The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-12-12 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINAL DECEMBER 12, 2007 LANE AUDITORIUM COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 2:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order. Work Sessions: 2. 2:00 p.m. - 3:15 p.m. - Five Year Financial Plan, continued discussion. Recess and Reconvene in Room 235 3. 3:30 p.m. - Code of Governance. 4. 5:15 p.m. - Closed Session. 6:00 P.M. LANE AUDITORIUM 5. Call to Order. 5a. Certify Closed Session. 6. Pledge of Allegiance. 7. Moment of Silence. 8. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 9. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda. 10. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). PUBLIC HEARINGS: 11. PROJECT: SP-2007-0034. First Church of the Nazarene - Church. PROPOSAL: Church with seating for 374 persons, on a 7.32-acre portion of a 865.167 -acre parcel. LOCATION: North side of intersection of Richmond Rd (US 250) and Louisa Rd (Rt 22), south of Interstate 64. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna. (Deferred from November 7,2007) 12. PROJECT: ZMA-2004-022. Treesdale Park (Sian #33). PROPOSAL: Rezone 6.60 acres from R4 residential zoning district which allows residential uses (4 units per acre) to PRO (Planned Residential District) - which allows residential uses (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses. This request proposes a total of 90 units at a density of 14 units per acres and no commercial uses. LOCATION: 640 E Rio Road, south of Towne Lane on the west side of East Rio Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio. 13. PROJECT: SP-2007-021. Beth Goldstein (Yoaa Meditation Studio) - (Sian #46). PROPOSED: Private school for yoga instruction with classes up to eight days per month, up to 20 students per class. LOCATION: 6482 Dick Woods Rd (Rt 637), approximately one-half mile west of the intersection with Burch's Creek Rd (Rt 689). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 14. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-004. Oakleiah Farm (Sian # 62). PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.82 acres from R-6 zoning district which allows residential uses and 6 units/acre to NMD - Neighborhood Model zoning district which allows residential mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses and 3 - 34 units/acre. Proposed number of units is 109 for a density of 12.3 units/acre. LOCATION: 547 Rio Rd West (Rt 631) directly across the street from Woodburn Rd (Rt 659). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio. 15. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-006. Three Notch'd Center. PROPOSAL: Rezone 2.3 from LI Light Industrial, which allows industrial, office, and limited commercial uses (no residential use)to PD-SC Planned Development Shopping Center, which allows for shopping centers, retail sales and service uses; and residential by special use permit (15 units/ acre). The proposal is to redevelop the site with two office/commercial buildings with a total of 40,500 square feet. LOCATION: 5368, 5374, and 5382 Three Notch'd Rd, located on the northside of Three Notch'd Rod approx 500 feet west of its intersection with Parkview Dr. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 16. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-011. Patterson Subdivision. PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 unit/acre) to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 15 dwelling units. LOCATION: Between Lanetown Rd and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Rd, Lanetown Rd, and Railroad Avenue. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall 17. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-014. Libertv Hall Amendment (Sian # 36 & 39). PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.01 acres from NMD Neighborhood Model District - residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses) to NMD Neighborhood Model District - residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses to amend the proffers to allow for for-lease affordable housing for approved units. No additional dwelling units are proposed. LOCATION: Tax Map 56, Parcels 97A, 97A1, and 97 (only a .833 acre southwest portion of the property as shown on the General Development Plan) along Radford Lane near its intersection with Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt 250 W). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall 18. From the Board: Committee Reports. 19. Adjourn. CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 10.1 Approval of Minutes: March 12(A), March 14(A), March 19(A), June 6 and July 11, 2007. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Five-Year Financial Plan Work Session AGENDA DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSALlREQU EST: Review of Five-Year Financial Plan Work Session ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Foley, Breeden, Wiggans, Vinzant LEGAL REVIEW: No REVIEWED BY: /---- /~\ I ATTACHMENTS: Yes BACKGROUND: On November 14, staff presented the Board with a balanced Five Year Financial Plan. The plan included revenue and expenditure forecasts as well as a set of assumptions used to balance the plan. The presentation from the previous work session is attached for your information. This Wednesday's work session will be a continuation of the discussion from November 14th and will focus on prioritization of budget goals. RECOMMENDATIONS: For information only. ATTACHMENTS Five Year Financial Plan Presentation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Code of Governance AGENDA DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Code of Governance Work Session ACTION: INFORMATION: X STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Elliott, Foley, and Davis; and Mrs. Jordan and Mrs. Allshouse. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes ___------ ~~. BACKGROUND: _;( At the first meeting of January each year, the Board of Supervisors elects a Chairman and Vice-Chairman, establishes its meeting calendar and addresses other items related to its operation for the upcoming calendar year, including adoption of the Board's "Rules of Procedure." LEGAL REVIEW: Yes REVIEWED BY: STRATEGIC PLAN: This work session topic supports the County's mission "to enhance the well-being and quality of life for all citizens through the provision of the highest level of public service consistent with the prudent use of public funds." DISCUSSION: On December 12, Mike Chandler, Director of Education, Citizen's Planning Education Association of Virginia, Professor Emeritus, Virginia Tech, will facilitate a "Code of Governance" work session to provide time for Board members to discuss operational and procedural items that may benefit the Board in the upcoming year. Mr. Chandler intends to contact Board members prior to the work session to assist him as he identifies topics for discussion. For the Board's information, attached is the Board's "Rules of Procedure" adopted in January 2007. BUDGET IMPACT: While this work session will not impact the budget, resulting changes in the Board's meeting procedures could impact administrative costs. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the Board identify issues it wishes to address in this work session. Attachment 1: 2007 Rules of Procedure Attachment 1 RULES OF PROCEDURE ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS A. Officers 1. Chairman. The Board at its annual meeting shall elect a Chairman who, if present, shall preside at such meeting and at all other meetings during the year for which elected. In addition to being presiding officer, the Chairman shall be the head official for all the Board's official functions and for ceremonial purposes. He shall have a vote but no veto. (Virginia Code Sections 15.2-1422 and 15.2-1423) 2. Vice-Chairman. The Board at its annual meeting shall also elect a Vice-Chairman, who, if present, shall preside at meetings in the absence of the Chairman and shall discharge the duties of the Chairman during his absence or disability. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1422) 3. Term of Office. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected for one-year terms; but either or both may be re-elected for one or more additional terms. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1422) 4. Absence of Chairman and Vice-Chairman. If the Chairman and Vice Chairman are absent from any meeting, a present member shall be chosen to act as Chairman. B. Clerk and Deputy Clerks The Board at its annual meeting shall designate a Clerk and one or more Deputy Clerks who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. The duties of the Clerk shall be those set forth in Virginia Code Section 15. 2-1539 and such additional duties set forth in resolutions of the Board as adopted from time to time. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416) C. Meetings 1. Annual Meeting. The first meeting in January held after the newly elected members of the Board shall have qualified, and the first meeting held in January of each succeeding year, shall be known as the annual meeting. At such annual meeting, the Board shall establish the days, times, and places for regular meetings of the Board for that year. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416) 2. Regular Meetings. The Board shall meet in regular session on such day or days as has been established at the annual meeting. The Board may subsequently establish different days, times, or places for such regular meetings by passing a resolution to that effect in accord with Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416. If any day established as a regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, the meeting scheduled for that day shall be held on the next regular business day without action of any kind by the Board. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416) If the Chairman (or Vice Chairman, if the Chairman is unable to act) finds and declares that weather or other conditions are such that it is hazardous for Board members to attend a regular meeting, such meeting shall be continued to the next regular meeting date. Such finding shall be communicated to the members of the Board and to the press as promptly as possible. All hearings and other matters previously advertised shall be conducted at the continued meeting and no further advertisement shall be required. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416) Attachment 1 Regular meetings, without further public notice, may be adjourned from day to day or from time to time or from place to place, not beyond the time fixed for the next regular meeting, until the business of the Board is complete. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1416) 3. Special Meetings. The Board may hold special meetings as it deems necessary at such times and places as it deems convenient. A special meeting may be adjourned from time to time as the Board finds necessary and convenient. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1417) A special meeting shall be held when called by the Chairman or requested by two or more members of the Board. The call or request shall be made to the Clerk of the Board and shall specify the matters to be considered at the meeting. Upon receipt of such call or request, the Clerk, after consultation with the Chairman, shall immediately notify each member of the Board, the County Executive, and the County Attorney. The notice shall be in writing and delivered to the person or to his place of residence or business. The notice shall state the time and place of the meeting and shall specify the matters to be considered. No matter not specified in the notice shall be considered at such meeting unless all members are present. The notice may be waived if all members are present at the special meeting or if all members sign a waiver for the notice. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1418) The Clerk shall notify the general news media of the time and place of such special meeting and the matters to be considered. D. Order of Business The Clerk of the Board shall establish the agenda for all meetings in consultation with the Chairman. The first two items on the agenda for each regular meeting of the Board shall be the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment for silent meditation. The procedures for receiving comment from the public for matters not on the agenda shall be at the discretion of the Board. Unless otherwise decided, individuals will be allowed a three-minute time limit in which to speak during the time set aside on the agenda for "From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda". Zoning applications advertised for public hearing shall be on the agenda for public hearing on the advertised date unless the applicant submits a signed written deferral request to the Clerk of the Board no later than noon on Wednesday of the week prior to the scheduled public hearing. The first request for a deferral will be granted administratively by the Clerk. The Board will be notified of the deferral in the next Board package and the deferral will be announced at the earliest possible Board meeting to alert the public of the deferral. Any request received later than the Wednesday deadline and any subsequent request for a deferral for the same application previously deferred will be granted only at the discretion of the Board by a majority vote. The deferral shall not be granted unless the Board determines that the reason for the deferral justifies the likely inconvenience to the public caused by the deferral. The staff will make every effort to alert the public when a deferral is granted. It is the Board's preference that a public hearing should not be advertised until all of the final materials for a zoning application have been received by the County and are available for public review. To achieve this preference, applicants should provide final plans, final codes of development, final proffers, and any other documents deemed necessary by the Director of Community Development, to the County no later than two business days prior to the County's deadline for submitting the public hearing advertisement to the newspaper. Staff will advise applicants of this date by including it in annual schedules for applications and by providing each applicant a minimum of two weeks advance notice of the deadline. If the applicant does not submit the required materials by this date, the public hearing shall not be advertised unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that good cause exists for the public hearing to be advertised. If not advertised, a new public hearing date will be scheduled. If the public hearing is held without final materials Attachment 1 being available for review throughout the advertisement period due to a late submittal of documents, or because substantial revisions or amendments are made to the submitted materials after the public hearing has been advertised, it will be the policy of the Board to either defer action and schedule a second public hearing that provides this opportunity to the public or to deny the application, unless the Board finds that the deferral would not be in the public interest or not forward the purposes of this policy. Final signed proffers shall be submitted to the County no later than nine calendar days prior to the date of the advertised public hearing. This policy is not intended to prevent changes made in proffers at the public hearing resulting from comments received from the public or from Board members at the public hearing. E. Quorum A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for any meeting of the Board. If during a meeting less than a majority of the Board remains present, no action can be taken except to adjourn the meeting. If prior to adjournment the quorum is again established, the meeting shall continue. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1415) A majority of the members of the Board present at the time and place established for any regular or special meeting shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of adjourning such meeting from day to day or from time to time, but not beyond the time fixed for the next regular meeting. F. Voting Procedures 1. Approval by Motion. Unless otherwise provided, decisions of the Board shall be made by approval of a majority of the members present and voting on a motion properly made by a member and seconded by another member. Any motion that is not seconded shall not be further considered. The vote on the motion shall be by a voice vote. The Clerk shall record the name of each member voting and how he voted on the motion. If any member abstains from voting on any motion, he shall state his abstention. The abstention will be announced by the Chairman and recorded by the Clerk. A tie vote shall defeat the motion voted upon. (Article VII, Section 7, Virginia Constitution) 2. Special Voting Requirements. A recorded affirmative vote of a majority of all elected members of the Board shall be required to approve an ordinance or resolution (1) appropriating money exceeding the sum of $500; (2) imposing taxes; or (3) authorizing the borrowing of money. (Virginia Code Section 15.2-1428) 3. Public Hearings. The Board shall not decide any matter before the Board requiring a public hearing until the public hearing has been held. The Board may, however, at its discretion, defer or continue the holding of a public hearing or consideration of such matter. The procedures for receiving comment from the applicant and the public for public hearings shall be at the discretion of the Board. Unless otherwise decided, the applicant shall be permitted no more than ten minutes to present its application. Following the applicant's presentation, any member of the public shall be permitted no more than three minutes to present public comment. Speakers are limited to one appearance at any public hearing. Following the public comments, the applicant shall be permitted no more than five minutes for a rebuttal presentation. 4. Motion to Amend. A motion to amend a motion before the Board, properly seconded, shall be discussed and voted by the Board before any vote is taken on the original motion unless the motion to amend is accepted by both the members making and seconding the original motion. If the motion to amend is approved, the amended motion is then before the Board for its consideration. If the motion to amend is not approved, the original motion is again before the Board for its consideration. Attachment 1 5. Previous Question. Discussion of any motion may be terminated by any member moving the "previous question". Upon a proper second, the Chairman shall call for a vote on the motion of the previous question. If approved by a majority of those voting, the Chairman shall immediately call for a vote on the original motion under consideration. A motion of the previous question shall not be subject to debate and shall take precedence over any other matter. 6. Motion to Reconsider. Any decision made by the Board may be reconsidered if a motion to reconsider is made at the same meeting or an adjourned meeting held on the same day at which the matter was decided. The motion to reconsider may be made by any member of the Board. Upon a proper second, the motion may be discussed and voted. The effect of the motion to reconsider, if approved, shall be to place the matter for discussion in the exact position it occupied before it was voted upon. 7. Motion to Rescind. Any decision made by the Board, except for zoning map amendments, special use permit decisions, and ordinances, (these exceptions shall only be subject to reconsideration as provided above) may be rescinded by a majority vote of all elected members of the Board. The motion to rescind may be made by any member of the Board. Upon a proper second, the motion may be discussed and voted. The effect of the motion to rescind, if approved, is to nullify the previous decision of the Board. Zoning map amendments, special use permit decisions and ordinances may be rescinded or repealed only upon meeting all the legal requirements necessary for taking action on such matters as if it were a new matter before the Board for consideration. G. Amendment of Rules of Procedure These Rules of Procedure may be amended by a majority vote of the Board at the next regular meeting following a regular meeting at which notice of the motion to amend is given. H. Suspension of Rules of Procedure These Rules of Procedure may be suspended by the majority vote of the Board members present and voting. The motion to suspend a rule may be made by any member of the Board. Upon a proper second, the motion may be discussed and voted. The effect of the motion to suspend a rule, if approved, is to make that rule inapplicable to the matter before the Board. Provided, however, approval of a motion to suspend the rule shall not permit the Board to act in violation of a requirement mandated by the Code of Virginia, the Constitution of Virginia, or any other applicable law. I. Necessary rules of procedure not covered by these Rules of Procedures shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order. ***** (Adopted 2-15-73; Amended and/or Readopted 9-5-74, 9-18-75; 2-19-76; 1-3-77; 1-4-78; 1-3-79; 1-2-80; 1-7-81; 1-6-82; 1-5-83; 1-3-84; 1-2-85; 1-3-86; 1-7-87; 1-6-88; 1-4-89; 1-2-90; 1-2-91; 1-2-92; 1-6-93; 1-5-94; 1-4-95; 1-3-96; 1-2-97; 1-7-98; 1-6-99; 1-5-2000; 1-3-2001; 1-9-2002; 1-8-2003; 1-7-2004; 1-5- 2005; 1-4-2006; 1-3-2007). RECEIVED AT 80S MEETING Date: /c1.-/ :( - (J' 7 , ~enda /tem #: Enhancing BaS Meeting Procbfeuretn' . S C'd ark s It/a/s: teps to onSl er 1. List the duties and responsibilities of the BaS Chairman in your Rules of Procedure. As example, allow the Chair to make motions, as well as summarize actions taken by the Board. 2. List the duties and responsibilities of BaS members in your Rules of Procedure. 3. Clearly note in your Rules of Procedure that all speakers must be recognized by the Chairman, including BaS members, before speaking. 4. Modify your agenda such that other matters, new business and unfinished business are scheduled later on the agenda rather than earlier. 5. Limit discussion on other matters to five minutes per topic unless a super majority of the BaS (5 members) votes to increase discussion time for another 5 minutes. 6. To save staff time, Board time and to be more accountable to the public, maintain podcasts and defer verbatim minutes in favor of summary minutes. 7. State in your revised Rules of Procedure that the BaS follows Robert's Rules Small Board Procedures. This streamlines and simplifies Board procedure resulting in greater meeting efficiency. 8. To keep your BaS meetings timely, limit the amount of time for matters from the public, not requiring a public hearing, to a total of ten, fifteen or twenty total minutes. This section of your agenda should be called "Citizen Comments" or "Public Address." In most communities, this appears after scheduled public hearings. Another option would be to continue your practice of allowing each person wishing to address the BaS three minutes. \ " RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Date: /.2- /:2 -67 S. A . Agenda Item #: 3 BO Meetmg Assessment ctlOns ~ . Clerk's initials: Rated Above Average B- or HIgher Each BOS Member prepares for meetings, listens carefully to what others have to say during meetings and tolerates different opinions during meetings Resulting BOS Themes: The BOS is present, prepared and patient Others? Each BOS member explores and studies issues before offering solutions and each feel their individual contribution during meetings is positive. The BOS meeting days and meeting times are convenient for the BOS membership, and the meeting packet they receive is usually clear and understandable. Resulting BOS Themes: Reflective and responsibly involved Others? BOS Meeting Assessment Actions Rated Average or C My BOS colleagues listen to what others have to say during meetings and their contribution during meetings is positive, The BOS agenda format helps the Board work efficiently. BOS Implications: Successful meetings are a function of effective communication, effective listening and planned (agenda driven) performance. Other Implications? BOS Meeting Assessment Actions Rated Below Average C- or Lower BOS members have enough time to prepare for Board meetings. 2.33 or C- Board conflicts are openly explored and constructively managed 2.16 or C- Board agreements are explicit and clear 2.16 or C- Our Board meetings proceed as intended and achieve intended outcomes 2.00 or C- Board actions are clearly summarized before meetings adjourn 1.83 or D+ Our meetings stay on track 1.66 or D BOS Implications: Meetings flounder when they get off track, lose focus and wander. Successful groups and successful meetings require openness, clarity of purpose and a commitment to perform according to a plan or strategy. 3:30 p.m. 3:40 p.m. 3:50 p.m. 4:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. 5:00 p.m. 5:15 p.m. AGENDA Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Work Session December 12, 2007 Effective Governance: A Function of Effective Procedure Conducting BOS Business: BOS Meeting Data Documenting BOS Business: Board Minutes and Podcasts Measuring BOS Meeting Processes: A Meeting Assessment Exercise Improving BOS Performance: How Rules of Procedure Can Help Enhancing BOS Meeting Procedure: Steps to Consider Needed Next Steps Adjourn Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Meeting Assessment Exercise RECEIVED AT 80S MEETING Date: /.2- /:l- () 7 ... . .._,... ~ Clerk's JnltiaJs: ~ o l Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Work Session December 12, 2007 Michael Chandler Richmond, VA .. Aggregate Assessment Results on a 4.0 Scale 1. I come prepared for meetings. 2. I listen carefully to what others have to say during Board meetings. 3. I tolerate different opinions during our meetings. 4. The BOS meeting days and meeting times are convenient for me. 5. I explore and study issues before offering a solution. 6. My contribution/participation during meetings is positive. 7. The meeting packet I receive from staff is clear and understandable. 8. My colleagues' contribution during meetings is positive. 9. Our BOS agenda format helps the Board work efficiently. 10. Board members express themselves openly, honestly and directly during meetings. 11. BOS meetings days and times are convenient for the public. 12. I experience a sense of accomplishment following BOS meetings. 13. My Board colleagues listen to what others have to say. 14. I have enough time to prepare for Board meetings. 15. Board agreements are explicit and clear. 16. Board conflicts/disagreements are openly explored and managed constructively. 17. Our meetings proceed as intended and achieve intended outcomes. 18. Board actions are summarized and are clear before meetings adjourn. 19. Our meetings stay on track. Aggregate Score 3.83 A+ 3.50 B+ 3.50 B+ 3.16 B- 3.16 B- 3.00 B- 3.00 B- 2.66 C 2.66 C 2.66 C 2.50 C 2.50 C 2.50 C 2.33 C- 2.16 C- 2.16 C- 2.00 C- 1.83 D+ 1.66 D 2.77/4.00 C+ , Meeting Assessment Survey Summary Please mark one number for each question or statement. Always Usually Sometimes Rarely Never 1. I have enough time to prepare for 2 2 Board meetings. 2. The meeting packet I receive from 4 County staff is clear and understandable. ., The agenda format we use at BOS ., .:>. .:> meetings helps us work efficiently as a Board. 4. The BOS meeting days and meeting 5 times are convenient for me. 5. The BOS meeting days and meeting 3 3 times are convenient for the public. 6. I listen carefully to what others have to 4 say during our Board meetings. 7. My Board colleagues listen to what 2 2 others have to say. 8. The Board members express 2 3 themselves openly, honestly and directly during meetings. 9. Board agreements are explicit and 2 3 clear. 10. Board conflicts/disagreements are 2 3 openly explored and constructively managed. 11. Our meetings proceed as intended (the 3 agenda is followed) and achieve the intended purpose. 12. My participation/contribution during 6 meetings is positive. 13. My colleagues' contribution during 4 2 meetings is positive. 14. I come prepared for meetings. 5 15. I tolerate different opinions during our 4 meetings. , . 16. 1 explore and study issues before offering a solution. 3 2 17. I experience a sense of accomplishment following BOS meetings. 4 18. Our meetings stay on track. 3 2 19. Board actions are summarized and are clear before meetings are adjourned. 3 2 Respond to the following questions by marking one of the listed responses for each question. 1. Should the duties and responsibilities of the BOS Chairman be included in the Rules of Procedure? Yes- 5 Do Not Know- I 2. Should the duties and responsibilities of the BOS Vice-Chairman be included in the Rules of Procedure? Yes- 5 Do Not Know- I 3. Should the duties and responsibilities ofBOS members be included in the Rules of Procedure? Yes- 4 Do Not Know- 2 4. Should "other matters from the Board" on your agenda remain in its present location? Yes-5 No- I Seems to be working, but 1 am open to suggestions. Let's have other matters at the beginning of our meetings as well as at the end 5. Are time limits for speakers from the public appropriate? Yes- 5 No- I 6. Should the Chair be expected to enforce and apply all rules of the Board? Yes-4 No-I Do Not Know-l Yes, but don't be rude. 2 7. Should all speakers be recognized by the Chair before addressing the Board? Yes-4 No-2 Yes, if it applies to the public. BOS members and staff should be allowed to speak at will. No, we do not need a formal rule. What the Board of Supervisors Does Well . We prepare for meetings . We get along well with each other . We are respectful to the public, county staff and each other . We listen well . We work as a team/group What the Board of Supervisors Does Less Well . We do not take care of our business in a timely fashion during BOS meetings. We have difficulty staying on schedule . We like to have lots of discussion, some do more than others, during our BOS meetings Ideas for ImprovinQ Board of Supervisors' MeetinQs . Add a third meeting each month or periodically schedule a day for work sessions to handle our workload . Consider changing agenda structure . Consider updates to "rules of procedure" . Identify ways to help focus discussions . Invest more authority to the Chair for meeting process Cl i; .... w w :E CIJ~ 01 al~ t-." -.....:: <(I C ~ .. " lit: .. W e-! > CD i! - .. "" w .- () Gi)Z~ W a; I ..!! a:o~o . ~ ~ Q) 2:: ::J C/) en .... ~ L- Q) - () en ......, en co () -0 o 0.. -0 C co en Q) ......, ::J C -- ~ -0 L- co o CO c: o .- tn tn Q) tn...... ~o s...o o s...>C'\I Q) > .. _Q)C'\I "Co~ c: c: s... C'tS C'tS Q) .c:c:.c (J s... E Q) Q) Q) ~ > 0 .- 0 Q) :EGO .-. -...... ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ ---- ~ .-. en CF) ~ .-. 0 ~ Q) 0) (]) ~ 0 +-' c: L.() :J ~ CD C ~ C ---- Q.) ---- .- en en E Cl> Q) E ::::J +-' Q) ::: :J +-' ~ ~ C :J '- en c - Cl> E .- ~ :S E <( ::: (() "' "' en "'0 Z >- a: ~ - Q) 0 a: w C/) ~ "'0 I- <( > (5 l- e U ~ a: 0 a (]) Q.. ~ ~ <( 0 - CJ) '+- :::J W 9-. () Q) Q) (f) z '" L.. 'C ::: ~ CV) ~ CJ) ..0 Q) Q) ~ Q) L- L- e L- co co Cl> 0 co a. a. ~ .- a. Q) Q) +-' ~ () Q) L- L- .- L- a. a. 0 "'0 a. ~ C't') lC) CJ) 0') ~ ~ ""'"" .- L.. ~ . . . . .~ CV) (0 . . .. c ~ 0 ()) "'0 ~ - 0 .- > ---1 U) - ... - cu en .- ()) Q) I .- Q) ~ c s...... "'0 0 CU CO ~ c c > ~ CU - c.. CU ~ C ... 0 U) Q) c cr: +-' -- 0 c.~ 0 ... 0.. -+-' ..c "'0 u CJ) ~ ~ ~ ... en ~ 0 ~ t E c en ..c ~ 0 -- ... () 0 ~ ~ -+-' 0 U) ()) -- CO ~ U) - +-' - 0 () ..c "'0 CU en -- s...... c LL -0 .- Q) S ... ... CU c en > -+-' ... 0 U) -- ()) t ~ s...... ~ s...... ~ 0 0) CO 0) z ~ -, CU <( Q) ()) . en \0 ~ c ... Z 0.. 0 Q) c CU -+-' -- ()) ~ .... 0.. +-I ~ .... en ..c en c ~ c u Q) E ::::J CU ~ CU -- CU 0 S S +-I I -- (.) 0 (.) I +-I I L{) I ~ ~ . . . " .4 C .- en 0) C I 0) C CI) 0) c CJ) ~ CJ) co t) -0 o (L o -- -0 :J <( '+-' 0) 0) E -0 L- eu o CO '+-' 0) 0) E >. L- 0) > 0) L.....c ~th 0) () C 0) :=:0 c\.t- o 0 .5Q en ..0 eu eu'+-' == C eu 0) > L... eu ~ en () '+-' en 0) eu L- () eu -0-0 o c a.. eu ......... Q) Q) E -0 L- eu o f'...cc 00 o CI) N ......... CI) L... eu 0) 0 ..0-0 o 0 '+-'(1. () 0 0......... ... ... 0) C .- '+-' en eu () -0 o a.. C eu 0) 0)(0 COO ~O ,+-,N C 0) ::J C o ::J UJ 0) C .- L... ~ ::J o \.t- -0 o Q) en C ........ ..c Q) en +-I en > C Q) o CI) co E c ~ o ~ 0) CI) Q) ..c L- en '+-' Q) LO 0...(0 ~CO CD . ... ... . . . '" 01 \.:) ~ C I'- z Cl) i= - 0 0 w "0 -- 0 t.LI~ C/) ~'Io;:) c C/) C\J (f)j ",' eu Cl) "" ~~ ..c C/) C\J ~I U ~ ~ ic(~ ~ c......... .- I Cl) 0 ~ w I (]) > ~ S ..0 ijj .. . " -- 0 CD J~ ~ Cl) E w . a: c (.) Cl) en c (.) eu Cl) 0) c 0 ~ C Cl) > -- 0 wf-J CJ.) (9 CJ.) eo wf-J ~ CO 0 -0 L- eo 0 CO k~ 1 I :1!;"1 ; i . t\;){ f:~~~ 1.1;: I"~ I ., ~'> " frl,..';j I..i:.:...;,:.....' :",\'.42' .. .. I/) "'C '- I (0 0 (0 0 (.) An 0 0 Q) 0 N ~ An N en U Q) "'l""" C Q) (.) CD CU 0 i: 0 J 0 0 N "'C 0 I I.{) I.{) '- ... 0 ca t/) (Y') 0 0 0 0 L.. 0 N N OJ ::J 0 u 0 N c Q) Q) CU 0 (.) J: E J '- 0 :;:, 0) '- 0 c: 'I- I ..q- en -- N N ct'l L.. U "'0 Q) c Q) c: a. CU 0 ~ J ::J ct'l en U ~ I N 0 CD An N 0 0 0 0 "'C 0 ~ 0 N N N N L.. N U ro 0 "'l""" C Q) 0 ... CU 0 J aJ 0 0 c: 0 N I 't'- 't'- o Q) E 0 0 0 N t/) 0 N ro s... U 'I- C Q) Q) <U CU 0 L.. (fJ J (.) ea c: Q) s... 0 I 0 0 0 C An 0 0 0 N ~ An N 0 ('t') U ""'" "'l""" C Q) ""'" CU 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 I.{) 0 I.{) 0 I.{) N N 't'- 't'- sJnoH 6u!~aall\l " en en c: .- ... Q) Q) :E CI) ~ t:: ~ 0 .~ .~ c: ~ Q) Q.. c.E :l 0 000 .... o -c '- ra o aJ .. 0) c: . .......... ........., Q) Q.) E: \.t.- O ~ 0) c: Q) --- Q) 0) ~ ~ cu "'C c: cu !...... cu ~ !...... Q) Q. ........., Q) E: ~ cu a <0 Q Q C'I C") Q Q C\I Q Q Q C\I tJJ ~ <<S C C) c: .- .... Q) Q) ~ M M tJJ ~ <<S C C) c: .- .... Q) Q) ~ ~ M tJJ ~ <<S C C) c: .- .... Q) Q) ~ ....... M tJJ s... :J o ..c: ..c: ~ON - <<S~ s... Q) Lt) :J 0'+-.. ..c:0C) ,.. ..c:. == :a... ........ <<S C) Q) Q) c: Q) ~ ~E tJJ s... :J o ..c:..c: ~oco -<<S. s... Q) M :J 0'+-.. ..c:0C) ,.. ..c:. == :a... ........ <<S C) Q) Q) c: Q) ~ ~E tJJ s... :=J o ..c: ..c:c.c ~oc.c - <<S . s...Q)M :J o '+- .. ..c:0C) ,.. ..c: . == :a... .... .... <<S C) Q) Q) c: Q) ~~E CJ) Q) E :.+:i---., O)...c Cc ...... 0 ~ E E co "+- CJ) o Q) "- E Q) .- -0 ...... EN :::l 0 c...... Q)~ ...c C -- 0 "2 E 0) co C CJ) co Q) -5 E CJ):.+:i "-(v) o .CJ) E 2: 0 Q)~ a.. '--' :::IN (/)0 ,,+-0 ON -0>- "- co ~~ (() .~ Q)...c ...c ...... I- 5 CD E -- "- o Q) Za.. tJ) "C I.. o (.) Q) 0:: Q) (.) E o "C I.. co o III . . Q) (.) I.. :::::I o en ca "C C (1) C') ca .... tn I- o tn .- CI) '= c:: (1) o a. :;j . CI) C/) '= (tJ'+- Q.O E"C o I- o ~ CO (1) ..c: ..... c o tn E (1) ..... - ill ill ill ill ill (f) (f) (f) ~ Q) (f) CO CO CO (f) c:: 0) CO ill ill ill CO Q) c:: ill ~ ~ ~ ill ~ ~ t) t) t) ~ (tJ t) ill ill ill t) Q)..t:: c 0 0 0 c a.. 0 - - 'Cf2. ~ 'Cf2. ~ ~ 0 0 0 N M ~ 0) 0 ~ ~ ~ N 0) 0 0 N C() ('I') N ...- -.::t 0 CO 0) 0) ~ I"- 0) N ('I') 0... ('I') ~ <( 0... <( ~ 0 I.- ~ ~ (f) 0... Q) ~ t) N (f) ..c N +-' (0 0 C Q ("\I 0 I"- ~ 0) <0 <0 ...- ('I') ...- N 0 l"- N C() M ...- co ('I') 0... <( ~ 0... ~ ~ ~ ~ <( 0... 0 i.....: (f) Q) ~ U N (f) ..c C") N +-' C 0 Q ("\I C/) E ro ro C/) (]) ro +-' -0 -0 E "- -0 C/) 0> C/) C c E c (]) c c (]) (]) (]):t:: 0 0> (]) O>c l.... 0> ro C/) <( <( +-' <( 0 (]) C/) +-' - ........ '- I Q) l.... C C'O c........ ro (]) > Q) ro u en :J C/) C/) 0 C/) E ~ O>E c l.... C l.... l.... Q. ..c Q) Q) 0 Q. oS :J 0 o:::~ () ro () c 0... S .- t/) "C L.. o (.) (1) 0:: (1) (.) ~ o "C L.. ea o OJ (1) (.) L.. ~ o (J) cu Q) Cl.. Cl.. - <( c c Q) E cu "'0 0.. c - Q) c E Q) <( E Cl.. - 0 x Q) Q) I- > OJ Q) C 0 C Q) 0 - N (j) II II <( 0.. I- 0 N (j) - c Q) E "'0 C Q) E - <( c Q) c E cu "'0 0.. c Q) Q) .::: E :::: (fJ <( E c OJ ..... Q) Q) .c c 0.. Q) c ..... 0 cu Cl.. N "u E Q) Q) 0 0:::: Cl.. () II (j) II <( II <( ~ 0.. 0.. N (j) () Five Year Financial Plan Responses to Board Questions How will the NGIC expansion impact new construction? Since NGIC is federal, it is nontaxable. The ancillary new construction (houses, commercial space, etc.) will be taxable. At this point, we do not have enough information on the timing and scope of the NGIC expansion to generate specific numbers. Our current estimates for new construction increases are as follows: 2008 - 2.4% 2009 - 2.5% 2010 - 3.0% 2011 - 3.0% 2012 - 3.0% 2013 - 3.0% Impacts of the NGIC expansion are assumed to be captured in these overall assumptions, which mirror historical increases in new construction. New construction generated in relation to the NGIC expansion is assumed to offset anticipated declines in other new construction. What is the breakdown of total assessments by category? 2007 2008 Residential Urban 5,553,231,400 5,466,537,100 Residential Suburban 5,316,974,800 5,288,328,100 Multi-Family 371,850,000 387,915,100 Commercial/ Industrial 1,802,865,800 1,887,504,800 Agriculture 3,843,497,100 3,887,577,900 16,888,419,100 16,917,863,000 Use-Value Land 2,824,773,900 2,899,355,900 Net Land Use 14,063,645,200 14,018,507,100 2007 Reassessment Agriculture (net land use) 7% 2008 Estimated Reassessment Agricu~ure (net land use)l 8% M.l~i-Farrily 3% ConmerciaV Industrial 13% M.l~i-Farrily 3% Residential Suburban 38% " What is the breakdown in new construction between residential and commercial? Resdiential Urban Residential Suburban Multi-Family Commercial/ Industrial Agriculture January 1, 2007 112,678,000 165,720,500 26,710,000 123,603,500 149,199,200 577,911,200 January 1, 2008 345,584,800 304,880,700 86,929,600 181,311,600 180,680,700 1,099,387,400 Difference 232,906,800 139,160,200 60,219,600 57,708,100 31,481,500 521,476,200 Agriculture 6% Multi-Family 12% Resdiential Urban 44% What VRS retirement rates are you using? Are these in line with the latest information in the VML newsletter? For FY 08/09, we are using a VRS retirement rate of 13.43% of salary for local government employees. This includes the base amount plus the additional amount required for the retiree health insurance credit. A recent VML newsletter dated November 2, 2007 indicated that "VRS certified employer compensation rates for teachers for the 2008-10 biennium that are higher than those funded in the 2006-2008 Appropriations Act. If funded by the General Assembly, state and required local costs for retirement would increase." This change should not impact local government employees. Provide more detail on the components of the CPI and the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD) for State and Local Government. The CPI is a measure of inflation that measures the cost of goods and services purchased by households. The CPI categories include food and beverages, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education and communication, and other goods and services. The IPD for State and Local Government measures the cost of goods and services that state and local governments typically purchase. The IPD categories include employee compensation, consumption of fixed capital, intermediate goods and services, structures (including buildings and roads), and computer equipment and software. While the IPD for State and Local Government is probably the best index to use for our overall expenditures, the local department operations segment of our budget more closely aligns with the items included in the CPI. Examples of local department operations include office supplies, training, telecommunications, and fuel. A more detailed comparison of the two indices is included in the attachment. Provide more details on the operating impacts associated with the libraries. · Crozet Library - $169,000 annual operating impact beginning in FY 10/11. This includes 2.0 additional FTEs, facility maintenance, utilities, and cleaning services. · Northern Albemarle Library - $713,000 annual operating impact beginning in FY 13/14 (year 6). This includes 12.0 FTEs, facility maintenance, utilities, and cleaning services. The $713,000 represents the County's share only (85%). How much has been spent to date on master planning? Since 2001, we have spent approximately $1.1 million on master planning. What is the impact of the 1 cent reduction to capital? A balanced five-year CIP was presented to the Board on December 5 that included the 1 cent reduction in years 2-5 of the CIP. The total CIP transfer is shown below. With 2~ allocation With 1~ allocation FY10-13 FY 08/09 26,805,046 26,805,046 FY 09/10 27,718,480 26,130,204 FY 10/11 29,578,895 27,745,352 FY11/12 31,454,645 29,492,319 FY 12/13 33,489,541 31,381,445 Difference (1,588,277) (1,833,543) (1,962,325) (2,108,095) COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE - w MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Steven A, Allshouse, Fiscal Impact Planner ~ December 11, 2007 DATE: RE: A COMPARISON OF THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) AND THE IMPLICIT PRICE DEFLATOR (IPD) FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVT. Background Inflation is defined as a general rise in the price of goods and services over time. There exist several measures of inflation in the United States. The Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) is the inflation number with which most people are familiar and is usually referred to simply as "CPI." This number measures the cost of goods and services that households typically purchase. Another index of inflation is the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD) for State and Local Government. This number measures the cost of goods and services that state and local governments typically purchase. The rate of inflation that is derived from CPI data can vary from the rate of inflation that is derived from IPD data in part because of differences in the types of goods and services that are included in the two series. The rest of this memorandum describes the types of goods and services that are included in the calculation of CPI and IPD and shows some historical differences in the rates of inflation generated by these two price indicators. CPI-U The Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers is published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). CPI-U reflects the cost of a fixed basket of goods and services that households buy for daily living. The "base" figure for CPI-U is the average yearly price level of the goods and services in this basket during the period 1982-84, The base price level equals 100.0. The index number takes into account the prices of goods and services in eight general categories and, additionally, breaks out prices in two special categories. The eight general categories include food and beverages, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education and communication, and other goods and services. The two special categories include energy and food alone. The BLS does include the cost of food and energy in the overall calculation ofCPI-U but, because prices in these two special categories tend to be quite volatile, the BLS chooses to list them separately in order to highlight the skewing impact that food and energy costs can have on the overall price level. Note that the "core" rate of inflation equals CPI-U minus the food and energy components of CPI-U, CPI-V and IPD Comparison December 11, 2007 Page Two IPD for State and Local Government The Implicit Price Deflator for State & Local Government is published by the V.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. The IPD for State & Local Government, unlike the CPI- V, represents the cost of a changing basket of goods and services. (This situation is thought to represent an advantage of the IPD over the CPI-V in the sense that changes in state and local government consumption preferences automatically are taken into account in the IPD). The market basket covered by the IPD for State & Local Government contains goods and services that state and local governments purchase in order to produce goods and services for the public. The categories included in the calculation of the IPD for State & Local Government include employee compensation, consumption offixed capital, intermediate goods and services (including durable and non-durable intermediate goods), structures (including buildings and roads), and computer equipment & software. The year 2000 represents the base year for the current IPD for State & Local Government series. The index number for the year 2000 equals 100.0. It should be pointed out there exists some overlap in the types of goods and services that state and local governments purchase, and the types of goods and services that households buy. Both categories of consumer, for example, purchase computers, gasoline, and pencils. Households, however, generally do not purchase highways, while state and local governments typically do not buy diapers, This situation means that, for some types of goods and services that state and local governments buy, the IPD index calculation incorporates changes in CPI-V while, for certain other types of goods and services that state and local governments purchase, the IPD calculation ignores CPI-V and takes into account changes in other inflation gauges, such as the Producer Price Index (pPI), and construction cost indexes specific to buildings and other types of infrastructure. The IPD for State & Local Government Expenditures, in other words, relies on a mix of indexes for various input costs in order to derive an overall rate of inflation for the types of goods and services that state and local governments purchase. Historical Annual Rates of Change in CPI-U and IPD As mentioned previously, the base year for the IPD for State & Local Government is 2000 and the index number for that year equals 100.0. The IPD index number for 2006 came to 128.37. These figures mean that, between 2000 and 2006, the cost of the types of goods and services that state and local governments purchase increased by 28.37%. This last number implies an average annual inflation rate of 4.25%. During the same time period, in comparison, the index number for CPI-U rose :from 172.2 to 201.6 or by 17.07%. This increase represents an average annual inflation rate of 2.66%. The difference, then, between the average annual increase in IPD for State and Local Government and the average annual increase in CPI-U equaled 4.25% - 2.66% = 1.59 percentage points. This last number means that, on average, IPD for State and Local Government increased annually at a rate that was roughly 60% higher than was the rate of increase in CPI-U. SAA/saa f '.t Date: RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING 1-2-/.2- ~ 7 . nJ Frozen Positions Agenda Item #: Clerk's Initials: (j Director of Management and Budget - Directs the work of the County's Office of Management and Budget, which includes complex budgeting, fiscal reporting and cost-effectiveness functions and oversight for the preparation of the County's annual operating and capital budgets, including long-range financial planning, debt service management and performance budgeting. Organizational Development Manager - Provides expert consultation, analysis, facilitation, research and project management in all areas related to the education, training and development of employees. Assistant County Attorney - Serves as Assistant to the County Attorney in providing general legal services for the County Administration, School Administration, the Board of Supervisors, the County School Board and all other Boards, Commissions, and agencies of the County. This position was new in FY 07/08. Tax Clerk Senior - Performs responsible clerical and technical work in the review and processing of tax returns from individuals and businesses. Finance Office Associate - Performs a wide variety of clerical and secretarial services for the Department of Finance. Animal Control Officer - Performs routine protective service work in the enforcement of ordinances regulating the keeping of animals within the County. Civilian Patrol Assistant (Police Department) - Performs administrative work including walk in reports from a wide variety of victims and witnesses, applicant fingerprinting, and liaison with all courts; responds to calls that do not require a sworn officer. Police Investigator - Provides crime prevention and increased safety through the effective case development, arrest and prosecution of those involved in criminal activities. Eligibility Worker - Interviews applicants, determines eligibility, and processes applications for a variety of eligibility programs including Food Stamps, Medicaid Programs, Family Access to Medical Insurance Security (FAMIS), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW), and the Energy Assistance Program. Mental Health & Substance Abuse Worker - Provides Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services to TANF and VIEW participants, with the goal of improving the employment outcomes of this population. Senior Employment Services Worker - Provides employment counseling and related support services for clients, including the hard-to-serve, who have employment, educational, financial and other needs. Civil Engineer - Provides inspection and acceptance of public and private roads. Planner and Senior Planner - Performs or assists in the development of studies, analysis and recommendations in connection with the current physical, social, and economic development of the County; Conducts site plan and subdivision plat reviews; Reviews request for rezoning; Prepares reports and supporting graphic display materials descriptive of research and .. .. recommendations; Explains planning problems and procedures to the general public or inquiry; Prepares or assists in the preparation of technical reports and long-range planning projects. Agricultural Support Planner - Plans, develops, and implements programs and services which promote and enhance agricultural business and economic activities. This position will establish and implement public relations, marketing and communications plans, promote agricultural development, and develop and promote conservation and educational programs. This position was new in FY 07/08. Intake Support Specialist - Performs a wide variety of specialized clerical and administrative tasks including coordinating the intake and processing of multiple development related applications and issuing various permits. Memorandum DATE: Members, Board of su~o,s Ella W. Jordan, CMC, Cle~~ December 6, 2007 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Reading List for December 12,2007 March 12(A), 2007 - March 14(A), 2007 - March 19(A), 2007 - Ms. Thomas Ms. Thomas Mr. Dorrier June 6, 2007 Pages 1-31(end at Item #8a) - Mr. Dorrier Pages 31 (begin at Item #8a) - Mr. Boyd July 11, 2007 Pages 1-32(end at Item #16) - Mr. Wyant NOTE: Please remember to pull your minutes at the meeting, if they are not read. Thanks. /ewj COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: SP-2007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene- Church AGENDA DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSALlREQUEST: Request to approve a new church with seating for 374 persons based on modifications submitted in response to the Board of Supervisors' request that the proposed physical size be reduced ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Cilimberg, Clark ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: /"" f LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: On November 7,2007, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this item, which was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on October 9, 2007 with the following conditions: 1) The church's improvements and the scale and location of the improvements shall be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan entitled "Conceptual Master Plan, Charlottesville First Church of the Nazarene", prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC, and dated "15AUG07.", provided that: a) Entrance improvements shall be approved by VDOT prior to final site plan approval, and shall include a right-turn lane at the entrance. b) All parking setbacks and undisturbed buffers required by Zoning Ordinance section 21.7, Minimum Yard Requirements, shall apply; and c) The number of parking spaces shall not exceed 150 without amendment of this special use permit. Relegated parking should be used to the greatest extent possible. 2) The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 374-seat sanctuary. 3) Facilities on the site shall be used for church activities and shall not be rented or used for separate commercial uses available to the public. 4) All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. 5) Virginia Department of Health approval of well and septic systems before final site plan approval. The proposed site design considered by the Board (see Attachment A) included a church building of 18,811 square feet. The Board expressed a concern that the building's size was out of scale for the Rural Areas and requested that the applicant consider revising the plan to show a smaller church building. The Board's discussion included this project's relationship to the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. This portion of the subject parcel is not included in that district, which begins on the north side of Interstate 64 (the church site is located south of the Interstate), beyond the wooded right-of-way. The immediate surroundings of the proposed church currently includes commercial and highway-related uses, a railroad, a fuel depot, and the Luck Stone quarry. The character of the area changes significantly on the north side of Interstate 64, where the Historic District includes large rural estates. The position of the church south of 1-64 and the design requirements to be established by the Architectural Review Board in order to protect the adjacent Entrance Corridors (US 250, Route 22, and 1-64) would also serve to limit visual impacts on the Historic District. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 4: Effectively Manage Growth and Development AGENDA TITLE: SP 2007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene - Church December 12, 2007 Page 2 DISCUSSION: To address the Board's concerns, the applicant has submitted a revised conceptual plan which removes 4,326 square feet from the rear of the building resulting in a reduced building size of 14,485 square feet (see Attachment B). An outdoor play area would be created in that area. The applicants are not proposing to reduce the scale or character of indoor activities. The size reduction has been accomplished by reducing the size of the informal gathering areas and of the multipurpose room used for worship and other activities. The applicants have stated that the smaller building would accommodate the same level of activity through using rooms for multiple purposes on any given day. The proposed congregation size (374) has not changed; consequently the number of parking spaces (150) is also unchanged. No other elements of the site design have changed. For comparison, staff has attached a list of Rural Area churches with seating of 250 or more that have been approved or are now under review by the County (see Attachment C). This church would be larger than the majority of the approved churches listed. However, there are three approved churches of similar (First Christian Church) or larger (Grace Community, Maple Grove) size. (Maple Grove was not held to a particular size by its special use permit approval.) Staff had previously noted that this church would be suitable in this location because it could be built on the site without negative impacts to public health and safety, most particularly public roads and wastewater management, and because it would be located in an area already characterized by commercial and extractive uses. The proposed size reduction would reduce the physical impacts of the building on the site and reduce the visual scale of the facility. Other staff findings remain unchanged. This application is subject to the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 ("RLUIPA"). One key provision of RLUIPA states: No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution - (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. (italics added) 42 U.S.C. 92000cc(a)(1). RLUIPA also requires that land use regulations: (1) treat a religious assembly or institution on equal terms with nonreligious assemblies and institutions; (2) not discriminate against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination; and (3) not totally exclude religious assemblies, or unreasonably limit religious assemblies, institutions or structures, from the locality. 42 U. S. C. 92000cc(b). BUDGET IMPACT: No budget impact is anticipated. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff and the Planning Commission have previously recommended approval of SP 2007-00034 for a larger church. Staff finds that impacts of the church on the site, surroundings, and supporting infrastructure are acceptable as proposed. Should the Board agree, staff recommends the following modified conditions of approval: 1) The church's improvements and the scale and location of the improvements shall be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan entitled "Conceptual Master Plan, Charlottesville First Church of the Nazarene", prepared by TCS Engineoring Co., LLC, The McKniaht Grouo. and dated "15/\UG07" ~vember 20. 2007. provided that: a) Entrance improvements shall be approved by VDOT prior to final site plan approval, and shall include a right-turn lane at the entrance. b) All parking setbacks and undisturbed buffers required by Zoning Ordinance 9 21.7, Minimum Yard Requirements, shall apply; and c) The number of parking spaces shall not exceed 150 without amendment of this special use permit. Relegated parking should be used to the greatest extent possible. 2) The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 374-seat sanctuary. 3) Facilities on the site shall be used for church activities and shall not be rented or used for separate commercial uses available to the public. AGENDA TITLE: SP 2007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene - Church December 12, 2007 Page 3 4) All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. 5) Virginia Department of Health approval of well and septic systems before final site plan approval. 6) If the use structure. or activitv for which this special use permit is issued is not commenced withinJhe meanina of Zonina Ordinance I:) 31.2.4.4 bv December 12 2012. the permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authoritv aranted thereunder shall thereupon terminate. ATTACHMENTS A. SP 2007-00034 Proposed Conceptual Plan, November 7,2007 B. SP 2007-00034 Proposed Conceptual Plan. November 20.2007 C. List of RA Churches seatina 250 or more <( +-' C Q) E ..c u co +-' +-' <( , ,. .... .c.. "'1 {I ilo:. r~ ~J;1 >: i; .,.j , d.. 1,:": J'..... ~ o .1 ~l ., 1.0..' ~ ~ ,:. : l~ .: . (0, ,:- -..; :;;:{ :: .' e ~ .:: k '1 ., .::J, 1'''- -; ~' ;., ~ : ~" ~ .: ! ., . . , t! :, .(r- 0{ ,7 . . :~' ~ ~ ~ %, :: I " , '"' J:: => I U L. :t ;J) , a:: . I..l. l.l.J ..... -I > !J} W ~ 0 ..J ,. a: i <( : ... ...... U , " ...:: ... "'0 ... ..... - .~ ,... - .... - ~ ... = :.. - ~ .,.;;; E - .... . I - ... .....\',~\ ..\\'\\'\ I \".., \ '\ ,. f \\\\ : .. \\ \. / "", \" I ' , - L..., " \ , \I /,.......: ~f I I I I I I I I " \ \-'" \ , , , , , \ , , , , \ I I \ , \ , , \ \ \ \ . . , , , \ \ \ \ \ \ I I l 1 I I I ,/ l \ " \ ' , i , I \ I , 1 \ / \\ \ . ' \ , \ \ \ \ ' \ \ , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , , , , , \ \ \ \ \ \ , \ 1 '- Li .. LI .~ ~" .~ ~ ~O :t?' ~~ ,'''' C , lJ~ '';1. - ..~ " .. ~ ~~ ~ ~ t L-t &;~ ~g~ ~ _1 Ill: ~a :i I, ~ n" ';.i ...( ~:,,; ~ ~' ~ ; 'i\ r:, ~ , ~ ~ .- < ~. 't "-~ ~ .. ," ~l ~ ? q~ ~~; ~'i ~ ~H ,-:"Oi . ~ . > . .. ~; ~', r' ~' fSJG l: :l.~ ~l'f ~i~ ,; r:. ~ Z w :z: I- u.. o I U a:: ::J :r: U tii a:: G: j ~ w 6 ..J a:: ~ U \ \ \ I \ , , I \ ... \ \ I , \ . I l 1 \ \ , , 1 \ , \ \ I, 1 -i 'E ~ ~ 5- pi: :.i e :-~.~ ~ I \ 1 \ ~ \ \ 1 I \ \ '. J....--.... I \ I I I I , I . I I I I I I I ~' 11 .....i ~. 0.1': u." t~ ~ Ii ~..r\..""." , I I I I I I . ,! f I I I I I I , , I I . , I ! I I I , I I , I I } I I I , , I I , } , I , , , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I . , ! I I I : i I I I I I ~.. I " \~ , , I I . I I . /.........~ .' , I , \ \ \ I I I , . I I I , : I I , I I I I I I I I I , " . , . I I ! \ 1 \ I I I , I ,.- I / , I I I I H I t '" ,~ CIl .. o o 'C ..5 ~ ".58 Q 8 '" '... ~M . , '. ~~ .5.08 i ~ ~ CIlu 'i ~ .~ '" ~ tg '~ ~ i~ g 1I~ 'iii' <Ii f! ,l~1 =... '" "CI ii' I~I i~ ~ 'I e ~~ '~~ ~a jl ~I M 00 a, .;- 00 :::: '0 '" > o a Q., < 'E > 8 Q., Q., < >- z ~ ~.::: ~ "fr:g ~ g" g~O~ .51313:6 '~ '5 ~ ~ >> ~ ';;: 0 .~ ~ ~o ;, ~ c = ~ :5 l;j ~ '5 U -a'~ ~ o V"l N ~ .~ (5 u tIl S ~ ~ 'E ~ ~ ~ 0 '" . -5~~~ SSO<: tIl c: _ o g..: N ~ ~ li~~ a, N tIl ;J ... o V"l N 2> M - o a, N N M e;- M 00 c.. tIl o .;- ..J. 00 c.. tIl ..c: e " ..c: U c: .2 ] u '" > ~ " g. ::; ..c: e o ..c U '" g- al >> a > 03 U a, 00 a, '0 " > 8 Q., ~ >- ~ gf..c: fr:92~ u '5 .E g" 6alUV"l ~1313&l '~'5 ~ ~ >> ~ ';;: 0 'S I-< ~ c t:: "0 "0 ~ ~ c c ~ c c ~ _ 8 .a'en] o V"l N ~ V"l N tIl ;J ... o ~ Q) 00 ]~ 8 ~ 00 c ~'i 00 N " 8 EU ~~ < '" a, .r. V"l V"l N do- 00 c.. tIl '0 o o ... o ..c e o ..c: U E 8 U o a, a, .= '5 ..0 .... " > " c: -i:f " > 8 Q., Q., < z 03 00 o c: a:.a '" - u ,- c: 0 oal .51313 '~ '5 ~ >> 8' ';;: '@ ;: !: .... 0 0 ~ c c c: c: " o '" N U "'Q. '<;5 8 00 tIl ;J "!..c: -. '~ ;;:; c: .;- 0 '" - g ~ ~ .~ o " 0<:.:; il... c: 0 o 8 ~ 'E o '" 0 o..!lZ & 'E g) U N N N N "" .;- V"l M 2> a, c.. tIl '0 o o ... o ..c: e o ..c U C '" c: " > o U N a, a, ~ -0 .~ ~ ~~ ....0 13~ 8M Q.,O Q.,c.. <CIl >- ~ " c: ,S: V"l o N~ ~ V"l 00 ~c: f::9 Vl '3 I'- ..0 8 M ... o ..c 16'8 ~ ~ ~ ~ :E ~~ -0".5 15 '~ 0<: c: ~ .9 'a -g f:! '" R~ :I: ,5 :! '" e;- a, c.. tIl ~ .~ .!J (5 ] ..c U ,S: ..c: ~ ..c U ::;> '2 ;J ~ ~ ~ . ... '~~ ~ '0 '0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~Q) g ~s g ~~ ~~ 8~~0~ u-. "'~...O<: O''Eo ii: ~ ~ 6' ] ~ ~.~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ (;) o -N ~~B3 ~~~ gc:~ 'O~~~~~~j~'8 ~~~ ~~~ ~"O~-5~:;-~~~,~ro "O\O~ 0:::~-5 0<: 15 '~ E 15 I'- 1(l ..0 - 0' 15>> 6 ,,>> ~ ..oV) IX ... R 0:: 2 '-IJ to 0 V) 0:: 1) '';:: ~ 0.0 ~ ij c: 0':::'0 00 E:~;::;'O '"~:::J: iil '" 6 ~~~jg~~i]~~~'~i~~i~ ~ ~ ts t:: ~ ~ 'E' - t:: cd ::30 ~ l=: .- ::10 ~ I-< iU 0-- 0""0011)00 ---to ."'~~ 0<:6]zii:0<:0<:.:;zo<:!ii:~.:;0<:~~,o o M.;- M alM 'i'M :;;:f;:[ a, I'- a, a, a, 'E > o a Q., < z ~ ..f o V"l N '0 " :Ii ... " 0 u ..c: u 1:: '" 0 '0 d) C 0 ~ ~] ~ 'O~38:E 15 'S 8 00 ~ 0:: 8. to "Cf .s 1l ~ ~ 15 '~ E "0<: c: j ,@ " ,s,! ,g ~..:.l ~] ~ "'0 N ::l 1-0 ~ ~~]~~ 0<: V"l _ :I: ,~ al N '? N a, '" ob a, c.. tIl ..c: e " ..c U ::;> '2 " E E o U " 00 '0 ii: " o as .;- 8 N 8 N '0 " > 8 Q., ~ '0 '0 " " > > e e Q., Q., Q., Q., < < >- z >- ~ " c: ,5 a, 00 00 Bb'n ~ .5 V"l'O N;;:: 0;] 00 M M ~ o V"l N 8 V"l "1' '" N M .;- <A o c.. tIl M N 3 c.. tIl ..c e o ..c U ::;> '2 ;J ..c: u 5 ..c U ::;> 'S ~ o U " e o I'- 8 N ~ .... <Z 00 .~ N '~ ~ , ~ 'E ,!J ] l:: ;; 0 ~ I-< ~ 8~~ >- >- ~ :!' C 'I:: B- o g o 00 N ..f 8 00 N :g M 8 V"l < I'- .;- r-: .;- ob I'- V"l N "- a c.. tIl <:5 N 8 c.. tIl 00 N "- a c.. tIl ..c ~ o ..c: U c: ,~ "' 'I:: ..c U .... .!J c: " U ... ,~ 0 -~-5 ] .S 3 u '" ..c .:; E U ~]~ ~ li: ~ a "'Q. 00 c: ;E ~ , ~ ] .~ ~ ~ 8~ >- V"l .;- 00 .f ~ '~ ..0 ~ B '0 ~ ';;: ~ l;j "'Q.c: 0.9 c: '" ,s,! ~"'Q. o ~ 12..c 3 '~ - - 00 00 - .;- I'- M o V"l N o d0- l'- .;- M "- o c.. tIl o .;- "- a c.. tIl " c: " ~ '" Z " .:; ..c: ~ " ..c: U '" " c: o u:; 00 c: ';;: :.::l ~ ~ ~ " ';;: " 0<: .... " '0 C ;J z 8 I'- o C 'I:: Q., (5 g 8 .;-. N o 00 N '" v;> M M N .;- "- o c.. tIl ..c: e o ..c: U '" g- al " u f:! o '" <: ~ " ';;: " 0<: b '0 c: ;J z '" ~~ 8"~ ~ ........ " = .... C .9 g U ~ ~.~ Q., '" '" ~~~ tc: ..f <<l -.::t:l-.~ ~~::J >> .";:: c u '0 0 ~ -['~ ~ u '" c: - I-< p.. 0 8 <Z ::; V"l '0 0<: Q., '" o 19 o ~ Cii V"l o V"l - "1' a, N V"l "- 5: tIl '0 o o ... o ..c e c: 11 .9 u ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ !::~ g 'u i~ IA\ .JAUnT X JAUNT, INC 1 04 Keystone Place Charlottesville, VA 22902-6200 Joyce Dudek AHIP Associate Director for Housing Development 2127 Berkmar Drive Charlottesville, Va. 22901 November 30, 2007 Dear Joyce: . JAUNT would be happy to work with AHIP to provide transportation services for residents in the proposed Treesdale Park Project. As you know, we have a fleet of over sixty vehicles and currently provide service that links with CTS routes throughout the area. With some additional financial support, we could create regular stops at Treesdale to ensure that residents there can access the extensive service that CTS provides. Please let me know how we can best meet the needs of AHIP's clients to ensure that this worthy project becomes a reality. . Phone: (434) ~96-3184, (800) 36JAUNT · Fax: (434) 296-4269 · info@ridejaunt.org · www.ridejaunt.org Moving Central Virginians For Over 30 Years COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: ZMA 2004-22 Treesdale Park December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: ACTION: X INFORMATION: Request to rezone approximately 6.6 acres on Tax Map 61, Parcels 182, 183, and 183A from R-4, CONSENT AGENDA: Residential to PRO, Planned Residential ACTION: INFORMATION: Development STAFF CONTACT(S): ATTACHMENTS: YES Cilimberg, Echols LEGAL REVIEW: NO OWNER/APPLICANT: Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP), represented by Mike Fenner of the Cox Company and Joyce Dudeck of AHIP. BACKGROUND: On November 13, 2007 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Treesdale rezoning. This public hearing followed three worksessions that were held between 2004 and 2007. At the hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval conditioned upon the following: . 1. Provision of extra landscaping at the property lines and along Rio Road. 2. Provision of terraced walls where high retaining walls are currently shown on the application plan. Since areas of critical slope will be disturbed, trees should be replanted in this area. 3. Provision of enhanced erosion and sediment control measures. 4. Provision that, if parking waivers are provided, the parking lots shown near the adjoining property can be eliminated or adjusted along with adjustment of proposed grading shown on the application plan. 5. Removal of the proffer for blasting. The Planning Commission also said that architectural commitments are not necessary and that a critical slopes waiver was not granted with the recommendation for approval. The Commission said that it would like to review and act on the site plan. At that time, the Commission can act on the critical slopes waiver. There were also minor wording changes needed to the proffers. They included the need for clarification of the improvements needed for the interconnection to the adjoining parcel, commitments to construct improvements for a signal at Pen Park Lane and Rio Road if the adjoining parcel does not develop, and providing for the opportunity for the greenway trail to be placed on the adjoining parcel. Staff also needed to see an executed agreement with the adjoining owner for access across their property to Pen Park Lane and off-site grading. Attachment I contains the action memo of the Commission from November 13, 2007. Attachment II is the staff report reviewed by the Planning Commission. Attachment III is the current application plan and Attachment IV contains the current proffers. DISCUSSION: Since the Planning Commission's meeting, the applicant has modified the proffers and plan to respond to the Commission's recommendations. The applicant has provided for extra landscaping and screening, committed to use enhanced erosion and sediment control measures and removed the blasting proffer. The other two items -- the retaining walls and parking area - relate to each other. A reduction in parking spaces can only take place at the site plan stage. If a . waiver to provide fewer parking spaces is provided by the Zoning Administrator, then the retaining walls can be diminished. If the waiver is not granted and the parking lot is needed, the Planning Commission will still review the site plan and will need to grant a critical slopes waiver. Terracing of the slopes can be addressed as part of the critical slopes waiver. So the Commission will have control over the adjustment of grading and terracing at that time. Staff has seen a copy of an agreement that is pending between the owner of the adjoining parcel and AHIP. At this time, the proffers are in legal form for adoption. There are no technical or substantive issues outstanding, other than staff receipt of a signed agreement between AHIP and the adjoining owner. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of ZMA 2004-22 inclusive of the application plan dated November 20,2007, the proffers da December 12, 2007, signed December 3,2007. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENT I: ATTACHMENT II: ATTACHMENT III: ATTACHMENT IV: Planning Commission Action Memo for November 13, 2007 Staff Report dated November 13, 2007 Application Plan dated November 20,2007 Proffers dated December 12, 2007 signed December 3,2007 " .I . . . Attachment I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 November 26, 2007 Joyce Dudek, AHIP 2127 Berkmar Drive Charlottesville, V A 22901 RE: ZMA2004-00022, Treesdale Park (Sign # 33) Tax Map 61, Parcels 182, 183, 183A Dear Ms. Dudek: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on November 13, 2007, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors by a vote of 5 :0. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1 , Provision of extra landscaping at the property lines and along Rio Road. 2. Provision of terraced walls where high retaining walls are currently shown on the application plan. Since areas of critical slope will be disturbed, trees should be replanted in this area. 3, Provision of enhanced erosion and sediment control measures. 4. Provision that, if parking waivers are provided, the parking lots shown near the adjoining property can be eliminated or adjusted along with adjustment of proposed grading shown on the application plan. 5. The preliminary site plan should be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to approval. 6. Removal of the proffer for blasting. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on December 12, 2007. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. Sincerely, f~~~ Elaine Echols, AICP Principal Planner Planning Division EE/SM Attachment II COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: Staff: Elaine K. Echols, AICP ZMA 04 - 022 Treesdale Park Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: November 13, 2007 December 12, 2007 Owners: Albemarle Housing Improvement Applicant: AHIP represented by Joyce Dudek Program (AHIP) and Mike Fenner representing the Cox Company Acreage: 6.60 Rezone from: R4 to PRD TMP: Tax Map 61, Parcels 182,183, and By-right use: 183A 26 (39 with density bonus) Magisterial District: Rio Proffers: Yes Proposal: Rezone 6.6 acres from R-4, Requested # of Dwelling Units: Residential to PRD, Planned Residential 90 at a density of approximately 14 units per acre Development DA: Neighborhood Two Comp, Plan Designation: Urban Density Residential (3-6 units / acre) Character of Property: Use of Surrounding Properties: The property has 450 feet of frontage along Rio Adjacent to this project to the north is the Village Road. The property slopes downhill away from Square subdivision which includes a mix of single Rio Road and west. Roughly 350 feet from Rio family detached, duplexes, triplexes, and Road the slope increases significantly. The townhouses. Further north is the Waldorf School, property has a narrow strip of land, roughly 60' Pen Park Drive and the River Run development. wide and 650 long that the applicant proposes Charlottesville Catholic School is across Rio to tie into the future greenway trail along the Road from this project. Single family homes line Meadow Creek Parkway. Rio Road toward the south. The entrance to the Stonehenge neighborhood lies 1,500 feet to the south of this property along Rio Road. Factors Favorable to this Rezoning: Factors Unfavorable to this Rezoning: 1. The proposed plan provides affordable 1. Two very tall retaining walls (25 feet and 15 housing at a level of 100% which is feet in height) are proposed at the edge of significantly greater than that the County's parking lots. Although guard rails will be policy of 15% of proposed units. provided concerns exist for the safety of 2. The density and use are in keeping with the children in this development. A note could County's Land Use Plan. be added to the application plan indicating 3. The proposal meets many of the principles that terraced walls will be provided to of the Neighborhood Model including reduce the retaining wall heights at the pedestrian orientation, neighborhood places where they are proposed at 25 and friendly streets and paths, interconnections, 15 feet in height on the plan. relegated parking, buildings and spaces of 2. Architectural commitments requested by the human scale, parks and open space, and Planning Commission have not been made. redevelopment. 3. The County cannot guarantee the City portion of the Meadow Creek Parkway will be built as soon as the County portion of the Parkway will be built; however, the County portion of the Meadow Creek 1 11 . . . Parkway is the top street construction priority for the County. 4. Staff is concerned that additional blasting provisions will not be enforceable. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds the use, density and basic concepts of this proposal to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As there are design aspects of the project that still need to be addressed, staff recommends the following actions before action is taken by the Board to approve this rezoning: 1. An agreement with the adjoining property should be provided for pedestrian access and a vehicular interconnection between the Stonewater development and Treesdale property to ensure that the Treesdale project can be accomplished. 2. Architectural commitments should be made. 3. The drawing on the front page of the Application Plan should be removed or statements made that qualify its purpose. 4. The Application Plan should include a note which says that terraced walls will be provided to reduce the retaining wall heights at the places where they are currently shown at 25 and 15 feet in height on the plan. 5. A statement in the proffers indicating that the greenway easement could be provided on the adjacent property should be added. 6. Modifications should be made to the wording of the proffers in keeping with County Attorney comments. 7. A decision should be made on the appropriateness of the "blasting proffer" and, if it is deemed to not be necessary, removal of the proffer should occur. 2 K STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: ELAINE K. ECHOLS, AICP NOVEMBER 13, 2007 DECEMBER 12, 2007 ZMA 04-22 Treesdale Park PROPOSAL The Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP) is requesting a rezoning from R-4 to PRD to allow for three multi-family buildings containing 90 units on 6.6 acres with proffers. In order to address traffic impacts from this development, the applicant is proposing to participate in the costs for signalization and upgrade of the intersection of Pen Park Lane and Rio Road. The applicant also proposes a right-in, right-out entrance onto Rio Road at the north end of the property. The applicant is proposing 100 % of the units will be affordable using the County's definition 0 affordable housing. The applicant plans to apply for assistance from the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program, a federal program that serves families at or below 60% of the Area Mean Income. Attachment A is the Application Plan, Attachment B contains proffers and Attachment C is the action memo from the previous work session. Attachment D contains relevant portions ofthe Jones and Jones Study for the Meadow Creek Parkway, which was adopted into the Comprehensive Plan in September 2001. PETITION PROJECT: ZMA 2004-0022, Treesdale Park PROPOSAL: Rezone 6.60 acres from R4 zoning district which allows residential uses (4 units per acre) to PRD (Planned Residential District) - which allows residential uses (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses. This request proposes a total of90 units and no commercial uses. Density is proposed at approximately 14 units per acre. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential (6.01-34 units/acre). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: The property is located in the Rio Magisterial District at 640 E. Rio Road, south of Towne Lane on the west side of East Rio Road. TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 61, Parcels 182, 183, and 183A BACKGROUND This project was first reviewed by staff during the Fall of 2004. During the past three years, the applicant has made several revisions to their original plan in response to staffs comments and changing affordable housing needs in the community. In October 2006 and August 2007, the Commission held work sessions on the request and gave the applicant direction on a number of items including ways to reduce impacts on adjacent neighbors, reduce the overall massing, and integrate the proposal into the neighborhood as much as possible. Since the work sessions, the applicant has retained the same number of units proposed, but reoriented the location of buildings to reduce their overall impact on the Village Square neighborhood. 3 . At the August work session, the Planning Commission made the following comments about Treesdale. Bold italics indicate whether the applicant has addressed the Commission's comments: 1. Provide an access easement for the greenway to provide a public access easement for pedestrians connecting the greenway trail dedication acreage to Rio Road. Done - a commitment is made in the proffers, 2. Identify trees for preservation and make a commitment to preserve them. Done - limits of grading are shown on the plan. 3. Look at the feasibility of removing some of the units on the upper floors near the houses next door. The applicant has limited building heights to 35 feet 4. Make a commitment to certain architectural elements/features such as materials, massing, and scale. No information has been included with the submittaL 5. Make provision for transit. Done through a transit "pull-out" on the plan and proffers. 6. Tie the development to a "built" Meadow Creek Parkway, not a "plan" for the Meadow Creek Parkway. Not done - this issue is discussed later in the report 7. Have proffers that guarantee that the project will be an affordable housing project, even if the tax credits aren't achieved. Done, 8. Make sure that dynamitelblasting concerns of neighbors are addressed. Done - this issue is discussed later in the report . PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY Prior to 1980, the property had an R-2 zoning classification. In 1980, the zoning classification was increased to R-4. The property is currently zoned R-4. In 2000, as a response to a special use permit request for Charlottesville Catholic School and other rezoning requests proposed along Rio Road, the Planning Commission said that it is not appropriate to intensify the development along Rio Road until the Meadow Creek Parkway is complete or underway. This was due largely to the fact that Rio Road carries a much higher traffic volume than it is designed to, impacting safety and convenience for users, particularly those who reside along the road. The Parkway is scheduled to go to bid in 2008. The Parkway is targeted for completion in the spring of2010. CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN County's Open Space Plan The Open Space Plan identifies no significant features on this property. Land Use Plan The subject property is located in Neighborhood Two and contains an Urban Density Designation. This designation provides a residential density of 6-34 units per acre. Urban Density Residential areas are intended to accommodate all dwelling types as well as institutional uses such as places of worship, public and private schools, and early childhood education centers including day care centers and preschools. The applicant is proposing a . 4 " density of 13.63 units per acre in three multifamily buildings with a community center. The proposal is within the density range anticipated in this area. Another specific recommendation from the Comprehensive Plan is: Consider the land use and park/open space recommendations of the Meadow Creek Parkway Final Report, May 2001, by Jones and Jones, for the areas adjacent to or near the Meadow Creek Parkway/Rio Road corridor. Developable portions of the area along Rio Road studied for the Meadow Creek Parkway were recommended to increase in density due to the transportation system the Parkway will provide and the proximity to the City of Charlottesville. (See Attachment D for the relevant portions of the Jones and Jones Meadow Creek Parkway study). Given the significant slopes at the rear ofthis property, the area closest to Rio Road (where the applicant is proposing development) was given the Urban Density designation. Due to the steep slopes to the back of the subject property, the area to the back was recommended to be open space. The density and residential type with supporting use (community center) is in conformity with the Land Use Plan and the Jones and Jones study. The recommendations of the Jones and Jones study also indicate that Pen Park Lane should continue to the west across Rio Road extending to and stopping at park space along the Meadow Creek flood plain. This recommendation also includes a road that runs roughly' north/south and parallel to Rio. A pending subdivision plat to the south shows the Pen Park Lane extension west across Rio Road. At present, the greenway would need to cross a portion ofthe property to the south to reach the Treesdale project. This issue is discussed later in the report in the section related to proffers. Conformity with the Nei2hborhood Model Pedestrian This principle is addressed. The applicant is providing sidewalks Orientation along the Rio Road frontage. These sidewalks lead to the interior of the property with sidewalks perpendicular to Rio Road in three locations. The applicant is also proposing to dedicate land to the County for a connection from the property to the greenway trail that is planned with the Meadow Creek Parkway. In response to concerns from staff about having stairs for a public trail, the owner has proposed to move the "public" portion of the greenway to the adjoining property so that access to a light and crosswalk will take place through that property. The adjoining owner has indicated he has no problems with this proposal. An agreement from or written agreement with the adjoining owner is needed prior to the rezoning Neighborhood This principle is addressed. The applicant proposes installing Friendly Streets and sidewalks along Rio Road. The applicant's proposal to tie into the Paths Meadow Creek Parkway greenway trail represents a neighborhood friendly path. The revised proffer exhibits show areas for dedication of right-of-way and an internal vehicular and pedestrian connection to 5 x . . . the adjoining property. An agreement from or written agreement with the adjoining owner is needed prior to the rezoning. Interconnected This principle is addressed. The applicant proposes connecting into Streets and the proposed Stonewater development to the south. Connection to the Transportation north and Village Square have been determined to be infeasible given Networks that Village Square is built out and the only potential connection is topographically challenging and contains a sewer line that would significantly constrain any road design. The connection to the south providing a second means of access and access to a signalized intersection requires construction on the adjoining property. The applicant has proffered that no occupancy permit will be issued until construction has been completed for the connection to the adjoining parcel and improvements to the intersection at Rio and Pen Park Lane necessary for the Treesdale development have taken place. An agreement from or written agreement with the adjoining owner is needed prior to the rezoning Parks and Open This principle is addressed. The applicant proposes two areas of Space common open space that will act as community greens. Limits of disturbance are shown on the plan to indicate areas where trees will be protected and preserved. An easement for the greenway trail is also identified on the plan and the proffers describe how it will be dedicated. Neighborhood This principle is addressed. The applicant proposes a community Centers center that would be available for meetings, neighborhood functions, and may potentially offer day care. Other centers in the area include Pen Park, Charlottesville Catholic School, Waldorf Montessori School, Charlottesville First Assembly and Covenant Church of God. The proposal to connect to the greenway along the Meadow Creek Park way through this site, beginning near the proposed community center, increases the functionality ofthe center and would support a activities associated with the Meadow Creek Parkway greenway and park. Building and This principle is addressed in part. The application plan shows Spaces of Human building footprints and height limitations of35 feet, which is the Scale limitation in most residential districts. At the last worksession, the Planning Commission asked for commitments to architectural aspects of the buildings that have not been provided. An image is shown on the front page of the application plan which mayor may not be intended as a commitment. It does show massing and articulation. It appears to show heights greater than 35 feet. Proffers do not include any architectural commitments. Relegated Parking This principle is addressed. The applicant proposes underground parking, which will completely relegate that parking. In other areas, the applicant has relegated parking behind buildings or to the side, which is considered relegated in terms of the Neighborhood Model. Staff notes neighborhood concerns about the ability to provide 6 q underground parking given the amount of rock in the area. Blasting issues are discussed later in this report. Mixture of Uses This princi?le is addressed. The applicant is proposing residential uses with a community center. Given the context and existing conditions, this principle is met. Mixture of Housing This principle is addressed. The applicant is proposing that 100% of Types and the housing be affordable. No mixture of housing types is necessary Affordability since this development is near residential developments with different types of units. Redevelopment This principle is addressed. The site currently contains two houses which will both be removed. The applicant has sufficiently documented each structure and has proposed to utilize what might be salvageable. Site Planning that This principle is addressed. in part. The applicant proposes minimal Respects Terrain grading by using the grade to provide underground parking. The applicant is not proposing to significantly impact the critical slopes that lie to the rear of the property. A waiver of critical slopes has been requested for slopes that are not shown on the County's Open Space Plan. One result ofthe minimal grading, however, will be two very tall retaining walls at the edge of the parking lots. One will be 25 feet and one will be 15 feet in height. Guard rails will be necessary at these locations; however, staff does have concerns about the appropriateness of these tall walls with a high population of children in the development. A series of terraced walls could diminish the height of the walls; however, this would require additional grading ofthe critical slopes and tree removal. Given the choice of additional grading/tree removal or 25 foot tall retaining walls, staff recommends the additional grading. Clear Boundaries This principle is not a?plicable. The parcel is not close to any edge of with the Rural the Rural Areas. Areas STAFF COMMENT: Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the reauested zonine: district: The PRD is intended to encourage sensitivity toward the natural characteristics of the site and toward impact on the surrounding area in land development. More specifically, the PRD is intended to promote economical and efficient land use, an improved level of amenities, appropriate and harmonious physical development, and creative design consistent with the best interest ofthe county and the area in which it is located. To these ends, the PRD 7 II' . provides for flexibility and variety of development for residential purposes and uses ancillary thereto. Open space may serve such varied uses as recreation, protection of areas sensitive to development, buffering between dissimilar uses and preservation of agricultural activity. The existing zoning district, R-4, would allow for residential uses; however the density of the R-4 zoning district is just under the recommendations for density in the County's Land Use Plan. Other zoning districts, such as R -6, R -10, and R -15 could provide for density that is in keeping with the Land Use Plan. The PRO is the preferred district for residential uses because of the flexibility in setbacks and the requirement for open space. The PRO is an appropriate district for this rezoning request. Public Need and Justification for the Chan2e The applicant is requesting this rezoning in order to provide housing that is affordable to persons making 60% or less of the median household income of Albemarle County. AHIP is a not-for-profit organization which has been working on this rezoning with the County for the past three years. Impacts . Environmental and Cultural Resources - The site is wooded and a significant number of trees will be removed for the buildings and parking. The intent of the applicant is for the construction of stormwater facilities to disturb as little land as possible at the rear of the buildings. Slopes in excess of 25% will be disturbed; however, these slopes are not part of a system of slopes adjacent to a stream or identified in the County's Open Space Plan. Two houses exist on the property that will be removed for the development. Neither of the houses is historically significant. Streambed and wetland - A streambed and wetland exist on the site. The headwaters of a non-perennial stream exist on the adjacent parcel. The stream crosses the Treesdale parcel at its most narrow spot. A small wetland is adjacent to the stream on the Treesdale site. Some grading near the stream and wetland will be required for stormwater management. Mitigation of impacts to the wetland will be required during the site plan process. The plan indicates that disturbance of this area will be minimal. Streets -- As mentioned earlier in the report, Rio Road is significantly impacted by local and regional traffic. 2005 VDOT traffic counts showed that 26,000 vehicles travel the road per day. In general, a road that carries more than 10,000 trips per day would be evaluated by VDOT for upgrades and/or widening. Due to the plan to construct the Meadow Creek Parkway and the existing narrow right of way and rural character of the facility, Rio Road has not been proposed to be widened (excluding sidewalks). Regardless of when the Meadow Creek Parkway is built, there is a need for a directional island at the new entrance from Rio Road. The County Engineer has noted that this is a compromise. The only effective means of control is to provide a median on the main . 8 i I roadway. He cautions the Commission and Board that these islands are not always effective means of eliminating turning movements in entrances. Regarding impacts to Rio Road, if the property were to be developed by-right with 24 units (assuming townhouse construction), the project would add roughly 230 vehicle trips per day onto Rio Road (based on standard trip generation figures). If developed to the density proposed with the rezoning (90 apartment units), the project would add 585 vehicle trips per day. Without the Parkway, VDOT is concerned that Rio Road is below an acceptable level of service and that adding more vehicles will further degrade the level of service. Currently, the level of service on Rio Road is an E, with A being an excellent level of service and F being the lowest level of service. Based on discussion with AHIP staff, and depending upon the final outcome of requests for federal funding, AHIP could provide housing in this location no earlier than Fall of 2009. This is slightly ahead ofthe Meadow Creek Parkway's projected completion in Spring 2010. At a minimum, VDOT will require the intersection of Pen Park Lane to be improved and that the applicant's connection to be made. At the last work session, nearby residents and Commissioners expressed concern that the Meadow Creek Parkway might never be built. Although the County has no control ofthe portion of the Parkway to be built in the City, the County has made its portion of the Parkway (Phase 1) its highest transportation priority and will advertise for bids in 2008. Usually construction begins about six months after bids. This issue is probably the most sensitive one because of the relationship to the City and the high traffic volumes currently being experienced. Attachment E contains current VDOT comments. Transit -- Staffhas reviewed the proposal with Charlottesville Transportation Service (CTS) staff who indicated that service to the area is not currently anticipated. The applicant has proffered to provide a transit stop and shelter and enough land for a bus to pull off of Rio Road to accommodate transit when and if it is provided to the site. The applicant has also proffered to design the site's interior to accommodate Jaunt and CTS On-Demand Link type services which use smaller transit vehicles. It is very likely that the target demographic that will reside in the project will be more dependent upon transit. The closest existing transit stop is located at the intersection of Greenbriar Drive and Rio Road, approximately % of a mile from the property and not currently accessible from this site by any pedestrian facility. The difficulty in dealing with provision of transit at this juncture is that VDOT prefers that transit stops not be placed on through-streets and CTS does not want to take transit through private properties. The "either/or" scenario in the proffers seeks to respond to future transit needs. Utilities - Indications from ACSA (Albemarle County Service Authority) indicate that water and sewer service is available. Attachment F contains current ACSA comments. Additional comments will be provided at the Commission meeting if they are received from the Service Authority. Parks and Recreation - Pen Park, a city park, is located approximately 14 mile from this site and the Meadow Creek greenway will be located near this site to the west. A public greenway trail is proffered through this development. The applicant is proffering the 30-foot easement for the trail shown on the plan. Because it may be more practical for the trail to be 9 I?~ . located on the adjacent parcel to the south, staff is asking the applicant to add language which would allow for the greenway trail easement to be placed on the adjoining property if agreeable to the owner of the adjoining property. Conversations with the adjoining owner indicate a willingness to work with AHIP on the location of at least a portion of the greenway trail on their property. Libraries-Libraries in downtown Charlottesville and Northwood library on Route 29 provide library service to the area. Emergency Services - Fire and rescue service has a five-minute response time from the Seminole Fire Station which meets expectations for the Development Areas. Schools - Students from this development will attend Agnor Hurt, Jack Jouett, and Albemarle High School. Eighteen elementary school students, 8 middle school students, and 9 high school students would be expected from this development. . Architectural Information requested by the Planning Commission - One issue that has concerned the Planning Commission from the beginning has to do with the size, scale, massing, and appearance of the buildings in the development. This property is not in the Entrance Corridor and therefore will not receive review from the Architectural Review Board. Comments have also been received from adjoining property owners relative to the size and placement of the buildings. Over the last several years, changes to the orientation of the buildings and limitations on height have been made. During the last submittal, the applicant provided renderings that indicated projecting bays on the buildings, stepped-back stories, flat and single-pitched roofs, balconies and pergolas, changes in fa9ade, and use of at least three different fa9ade materials. At this juncture, however, staffhas not received any commitments related to architecture other than to limit the building height to 35 feet, which is the maximum height in most residential districts. It should be noted that the drawing on the front page of the application plan shows buildings that may be in excess of 35 feet. For that reason, qualification of the rendering is needed on the plan or the drawing should be removed. PROFFERS Proffer 1 says that the maximum density will be 90 units. Proffer 2 commits to completion of a connection road between Treesdale Park and the adjacent Stonewater development before a certificate of occupancy is given on any building in Treesdale. The proffer also commits to participate in the costs for signalization at the Stonewater entrance and Rio Road. The proffer commits the applicant to install all of the frontage improvements shown on the plan and dedicate right-of-way where necessary. . Staff understands that an agreement between the adjoining owner and AHIP is being finalized which ensures that the connection can take place on the adjoining property. This 10 J~ agreement is essential prior to Board action because it ensures that the project can go forward even if the Stonewater project does not proceed. Proffer 3 makes a commitment to construct 100% of the housing as affordable. The applicant has provided that rents will be "affordable" for a minimum of 15 years. Proffer 4 makes a commitment to dedicate a 30' easement to the County for the purposes of connecting the greenway trail proposed behind the development to the Meadow Creek Parkway trail system. Staff believes that the trail might be placed in a better location on the adjacent property and is working with the adjoining owner. A statement indicating that the easement could be provided on the adjacent property would be beneficial to both the County and the applicant. Proffer 5 commits the applicant to reserve an area for a future bus stop on Rio Road and to construct a bus stop with a small shelter. The applicant also proffers to design the site's minimal interior circulation network to accommodate smaller transit vehicles such as Jaunt. Proffer 6 discusses a shared regional stormwater management facility with the adjoining owner. Stormwater management is a requirement so the proffer is not necessary. Proffer 7 commits to construct the multifamily buildings to "an EarthCraft Standard so as to be rated a minimum of "Certified" under the EarthCraft system". Proffer 8 commits to tree preservation. The application plan now shows the limits of disturbance, so the proffer is no longer necessary. Proffer 9 provides for a list of special precautions related to blasting. Zoning staff has raised concerns that they will not be able to enforce the proffer for blasting. Staff has talked with the Fire and Rescue Division of the County for input into resolution of the concerns. The Assistant Fire Chief has indicated that their inspectors issue permits for blasting and, along with their investigators, follow up on any complaints or mishaps. The Statewide Fire Prevention Code requires certain protective measures be taken when blasting. The Assistant Fire Chiefhas said that he believes the permitting requirements should cover the precautions needed for blasting. He will be available at the Planning Commission meeting to answer questions. Critical Slooes Waiver Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: This is wooded area sloping down from Rio Road. The applicant is proposing to disturb the area with retaining walls, utility pipes, and trails. Areas Total site Critical slo es Critical slo es disturbed Acres 6.65 1.3 0.5 20% of site 38% of critical slo es 11 )L/ . Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable alternative locations: This disturbance is not exempt. Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18-4.2: "movement of soil and roc~' Proper wall construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization over utility lines and along trails will prevent any movement of soil. "excessive stormwater runoff' Stormwater runoff due to steep slopes will be reduced in this area, as the slopes will be eliminated, and the site will have stormwater management controls for impervious surfaces. "siltation" Inspection and bonding by the County will mitigate siltation during construction. Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability. "loss of aesthetic resource" Wooded areas will be affected by the grading; however, the wooded areas are not shown on the County's Open Space Plan and the property is in the Development Areas. . "septic effluent" This neighborhood will be serviced by public sewer. Based on the review above, there are no engineering or planning concerns which prohibit the disturbance of the critical slopes as shown, with the exception of the use of retaining walls which has been discussed already in this report. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Factors favorable to this rezoning: 1. The proposed plan provides affordable housing at a level of 100% which is significantly greater than that the County's policy of 15% of proposed units. 2. The density and use are in keeping with the County's Land Use Plan. 3. The proposal meets many of the principles of the Neighborhood Model including pedestrian orientation, neighborhood friendly streets and paths, interconnections, relegated parking, buildings and spaces of human scale, parks and open space, and redevelopment. . Factors unfavorable to this rezoning: 1. Two very tall retaining walls (25 feet and 15 feet in height) are proposed at the edge of parking lots. Although guard rails will be provided concerns exist for the safety of children in this development. A note could be added to the application plan indicating that terraced walls will be provided to reduce the retaining wall heights at the places where they are proposed at 25 and 15 feet in height on the plan. 12 )5 2. Architectural commitments requested by the Planning Commission have not been made. 3. The County cannot guarantee the City portion of the Meadow Creek Parkway will be built as soon as the County portion of the Parkway will be built; however, the County portion of the Meadow Creek Parkway is the top street construction priority for the County. 4. Staff is concerned that additional blasting provisions will not be enforceable. Staff finds the use, density and basic concepts of this proposal to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As there are design aspects ofthe project that still need to be addressed, staff recommends the following actions before action is taken by the Board to approve this rezoning: 8. An agreement with the adjoining property should be provided for pedestrian access and a vehicular interconnection between the Stonewater development and Treesdale property to ensure that the Treesdale project can be accomplished. 9. Architectural commitments should be made. 10. The drawing on the front page of the Application Plan should be removed or statements made that qualify its purpose. 11. The Application Plan should include a note which says that terraced walls will be provided to reduce the retaining wall heights at the places where they are currently shown at 25 and 15 feet in height on the plan. 12. A statement in the proffers indicating that the greenway easement could be provided on the adjacent property should be added. 13. Modifications should be made to the wording of the proffers in keeping with County Attorney comments. 14. A decision should be made on the appropriateness of the "blasting proffer" and, if it is deemed to not be necessary, removal of the proffer should occur. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A - Application Plan dated October 18,2007 A TT ACHMENT B - Proffers dated October 18, 2007 ATTACHMENT C - Action Memo from August 28, 2007 Meeting ATTACHMENT D - Sections from Jones and Jones Study for Meadow Creek Parkway ATTACHMENT E - Comments from VDOT 11-1-07 ATTACHMENT F - Comments from ACSA 11-5-07 13 1ft; . ATTACHMENT A Attachment A is the Application Plan dated October 18, 2007 from the Planning Commission staff report for November 13, 2007 . . )7 Original Proffer: July 31, 2007 Amended Proffer: October 18, 2007 PROFFER FORM Date: October 18, 2007 ZMA # 2004-022 Tax Map and Parcel Number(s): 61-182; 61-183; and 61-183A 6.646 Acres to be rezoned from R-4 to PRD (Planned Residential Development) in conjunction with the "Application Plan," sheet 4.0 of the Treesdale Park ZMA Application Plan package prepared by the Cox Company, last revised on October 18, 2007. Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning request. 1. Maximum Residential Density. The maximum number of residential dwelling units that may be developed in Treesdale Park shall not exceed 90 units. 2. Road Improvements. Applicant (also referred to herein as the "Owner") shall cause completion of the following road improvements: A. Rio Road Improvements. The Owner shall dedicate land and construct a right turn lane on Rio Road (State Route 631) southbound from the northern boundary of the Property to the primary entrance to the Property as is depicted in the Application Plan. The land dedication shall include sufficient land area for Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 1 Attachment R J" '.! " . ',) . . . the turn lane and one foot green strip behind the curb. An eight foot sidewalk easement shall also be provided, and the Owner shall construct a five foot sidewalk within this easement along the entire frontage of Rio Road per the Application Plan. The sidewalk shall be constructed two feet from the dedicated right-of-way, thereby providing three effective feet of green strip for Rio Road maintenance. These improvements shall be provided in concert with the public road improvements submitted to the County in support of the adjacent Stonewater project. Treesdale Park's primary entrance shall be limited to a "Right-In/Right-Out" only entrance per VDOT and County direction. The Owner shall construct a physical traffic impediment (ie. a raised curb barrier) at the entrance to prohibit left hand turn movements into or out of the Treesdale entrance. The Owner shall also dedicate land fronting Rio Road from the Treesdale Park entrance to the southern property line for the construction of a deceleration/turn lane along the eastern boundary of Treesdale to serve southbound traffic on Rio Road turning west into the Stonewater entrance. This deceleration/turn lane will also provide access and a merging lane for vehicles turning south onto Rio Road exiting the entranceway into Treesdale. B. Proposed Signal at the Stonewater Entrance and Rio Road/Pen Park Lane Intersection. The Owner shall contribute one-third of the total costs associated with the design and installation of a signal at the Stonewater Drive (Stonewater's proposed entrance) and Rio Road/Pen Park Lane intersection upon the satisfaction of warrants at the intersection and the request of signal installation by VDOT and the County. C. AHIP Connector Road. The Owner shall construct that portion of the AHIP Connector Road allowing direct access between Treesdale Park and the adjoining Stonewater subdivision lying on the Property up to the southern Property line in general accord with the alignment shown on the Application Plan. Pursuant to the 2007 "Agreement for Utility, Storm water Management, and Access Easements" (hereinafter, "Agreement") made by and between AHIP and Rio Road Holdings, (hereinafter, "Rio"), Rio, the owner/developer of the adjacent Stonewater subdivision (TMP 61-184), will grant to AHIP an easement for ingress and egress over and across the access road on the Rio property to Rio's entrance into Stonewater (Stonewater Drive) from Rio Road. This Agreement enables a perpetual, appurtenent easement allowing all future Treesdale Park Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 2 residents, tenants, guests, invitees, licensees, and other designees the right to access the improved intersection at Stonewater Drive and Rio Road via the Connector Road. In the event that the construction of Treesdale Park precedes the completion and dedication of the public road facilities associated with the Stonewater project, occupancy in Treesdale would be conditioned on the completion of the public road improvements. These public improvements are identified in Attachment 1. The improvements described in this Proffer 3 shall be constructed to either (i) VDOT design standards pursuant to detailed plans agreed to between the Applicant and VDOT, and accepted by VDOT for public use or (ii) to Albemarle County standards for a private street with paved surface, curb and gutter and appropriate storm drainage improvements common to urban roads. 3. Affordable Housing. The Owner shall provide affordable housing (as described herein) ("Affordable Units") equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total residential units constructed on the Property, in the form of for-rent apartments. Each subdivision plat and site plan for the Property, other than those executed for purposes other than the creation of housing units, shall designate the units that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein. Affordability; Rental Rates. For the purposes of this Proffer 3, "Affordable Units" shall mean rental units which have gross rents (rent plus tenant-paid utilities) that do not exceed 120% of Fair Market Rents published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Developoment (HUD); provided that, in each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this Proffer 3, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utility costs. Term. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent affordable units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this Proffer 4 shall apply for a period of fifteen (15) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by Albemarle County for each for-rent affordable unit, or until the units are sold as low or moderate cost units qualifying as such under the County's Affordable Housing Policy. Conveyance of Interest. All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this Proffer 4. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 3 ,'ie L~' . . . affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this Proffer 3. At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest (other than for the securing of a mortgage or deed of trust) in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the Albemarle County Chief of Housing in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this Proffer 3 have been satisfied. Reporting Rental Rates. During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days after the commencement of the lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the Owner shall provide to the Housing Office a copy of the lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the lease. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the Owner shall provide to Albemarle County, if requested, any reports, copies of lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as Albemarle County may reasonably require. 4. Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway Trail Dedication. The Owner shall dedicate land within a 3D-foot wide access easement to Albemarle County for a "greenway" for public use. This greenway shall serve as a pedestrian trail or path through the Property connecting to the section of the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway trail with the alignment and layout in general accord with the schematic design depicted on the Application Plan. The section of Greenway trail and the path connecting to Treesdale's residential buildings is dedicated for future construction to be funded and completed by the County to meet the Class A trail definition as contained in the County's Greenway Plan. The ultimate design and location of the trail shall be established by the Director of Planning in consultation with the Director of Parks and Recreation and shall provide access to the Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway Plan. The plan for the trail link shall be submitted with the first final site plan for the Property and shall identify the location of the trail and specify its design characteristics. This Proffer 4 shall be satisfied upon approval of all relevant elements of the Greenway Trail link by the requisite federal, state, and local approval agencies. If the Greenway Trail is not dedicated by subdivision plat, the Owner shall be responsible for the cost of a survey and preparing the deed to convey the Greenway to the County before final site plan approval. After it is dedicated to public use, the Greenway Trail and all land within the access easement shall continue to be included in the total area of open space and amenities within the Property. 5. Transit Reservation Area. The Owner shall reserve an area for a bus pull-off from Rio Road within the northeast portion of the site, within the common open space area located directly to the east of Building 1 in general accord with the Application Plan. Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 4 Should fixed-route bus service associated with the Charlottesville Transit Service ever be extended to serve the section of Rio Road adjacent to the site, upon demand of the County, the Owner, at its own expense, shall construct the bus stop to accommodate a bus pulling off Rio Road and picking up riders in a dedicated lane located within the Property. In conjunction with the bus pull-off area, the Owner will also construct a small transit shelter to complete the bus stop. The specific design standards of the bus pull-off and the shelter shall be determined by agreement between VDOT, the Owner, CTS, and the Director of Community Development within sixty days of the County's formal request for the transit stop. In the absence of any fixed-route service, Treesdale will be designed to accommodate the CTS On-demand Link or JAUNT service within the community as a means of providing public access to residents per the existing programs. 6. Shared Regional Stormwater Management Facility. The Owner shall reserve land on the Property in general accord with the area depicted on the Application Plan for future construction and use of shared, regional storm water management and Best Management Practices (BMP) facilities to serve both Treesdale and the Stonewater subdivision. Per the Agreement, these facilities may be located either entirely on the Property or partially located on both the subject Property and on the adjoining Stonewater property. The facilities will be sized to accommodate both Stonewater and Treesdale. A portion of the Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway Trail shall serve as the means for maintenance access to the facility and shall tie into a stormwater maintenance access easement to be provided on the adjacent Stonewater subdivision as indicated on the Application Plan and as agreed to between the Owner and the Owner of Stonewater, Rio Road Holdings, LLC. 7. EarthCraft Standards for Multifamily Development. The Owner shall cause all multifamily buildings within the Project to be designed and constructed so as to be rated a minimum of "Certified" under the EarthCraft Green Building Rating System for multifamily development, as set forth in the EarthCraft House Technical Guidelines, version November, 2006. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Owner shall submit a certification from the EarthCraft certified project architect to the Director of Community Development that the building plan meets the EarthCraft standards. Before the Owner requests a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a licensed architect rendered such a certificate, the Owner shall submit to the County's Director of Community Development a written statement from the architect that the building was built to the plans on which the certificate was based. Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 5 . . . 8. Tree Preservation. Within the areas depicted on the Application Plan as "Tree Preservation Areas", no land disturbing activities shall occur except in accordance with Best Management Practices, as defined by the Virginia Department of Forestry. 9. Blasting Provisions. In all cases where blasting is required to support excavation for building foundations, garage or road construction, or any other earthmoving exercises as part of the development of Treesdale, special precautions will be taken by the Applicant to work with nearby residents to protect their homes from ancillary damage associated ,with such activities. These precautions shall include, but not be necessarily limited to: the use of seismographic equipment at the property line (or if necessary and agreeable, within structures, including basements) of adjoining or nearby residential properties to measure and monitor vibrations generated by required blasting; limiting the timing and duration of necessary blasting to normal business hours; communicating with neighbors regarding the timing of necessary blasting and monitoring procedures; conducting a preconditions survey of adjacent or nearby residential properties for existing structural conditions; and ensuring that all blasting efforts do not exceed acceptable seismic wave acceleration thresholds on adjoining or nearby residential properties. Submitted as of the day ,2007, by: [REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK; SIGNATURE P AGES TO FOLLOW.] Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 6 "1 /~ j ALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, INC. a Virginia nonstock, 501(c)3 non-profit corporation By: Its Executive Director By: Its: Date: If you intend to proffer to limit the uses of your property to some of the uses permitted within the property's proposed zoning district, the County suggests that your proffer contain the standardized introductory language set forth below. For Proffers that will restrict the uses of the property to certain specified permitted uses and/or those uses authorized by a special use permit the following language is suggested: Permitted uses of the property, and/or uses authorized by special use permit, shall include only the following section(s) ofthe Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in effect on (insert date of proffer), a copy ofthe section(s) being attached hereto: 1. (State section number and the use associated with that section) For proffers that will allow most of the uses permitted in the zoning district, but will exclude some, the following language is suggested: Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 7 -;'t-{ !- . . . Permitted uses of the property, and/or uses authorized by special use permit, shall include only those uses allowed in section(s) (insert section number(s)) of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in effect on (insert date of the proffer), a copy of the section(s) being attached hereto, except the following: (State section number and the use associated with that section) The date of the proffer should be the date that your application will be considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. By including the use associate with a section number the County will be able to verify what is being proffered so that there is no dispute (e.g., as a result of a typographical error) whether the proffered use was intended to be included or excluded. Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) October 18, 2007 Page 8 u COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 Mcintire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 MEMORANDUM FROM: DATE: RE: Joyce Dudek, AHIP 2127 Berkmar Drive Charlottesville, VA 22901 Elaine Echols, ACI P f!{G September 5, 2007 ZMA2004-00022 Treesdale Park TO: Dear Ms. Dudek: On August 28, 2007 the Albemarle County Planning Commission reviewed the above-noted item in a work session. Attached please find the section of the official action memo for this meeting describing the discussion and direction provided by the Commission on this item. Please note there is a change in your Planner. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. EE/SM / L: t.-- - ~ . . . ZMA-2004-00022 Treesdale Park PROPOSAL: Rezone 6.60 acres from R4 zoning district which allows residential uses (4 units per acre) to PRO (Planned Residential District) - which allows residential uses (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses. This request proposes a total of 90 units at a density of 14 units per acres and no commercial uses. PROFFERS: No EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential (6 - 34 units per acre), ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: The property is located in the Rio Magisterial District at 640 E. Rio Road, south of Towne Lane on the west side of East Rio Road. TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 61, Parcels 182,183, and 183A MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio (Sean Dougherty) In summary, a work session on ZMA-2004-00022 Treesdale Park was held by the Planning Commission. In a power point presentation, staff reviewed the applicant's proposal. The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposal, answered the questions posed by staff and made comments and suggestions. The applicant made a presentation. Public comment was taken. No formal action was taken. The Planning Commission made the following comments about Treesdale: 1. Provision of an access easement for the greenway to provide a public access easement for pedestrians connecting the greenway trail dedication acreage to Rio Road. 2. Identification of trees for preservation and a commitment to preserve them. .3. Look at the feasibility of removing some of the units on the upper floors near the houses next door. 4. Make a commitment to certain architectural elements/features such as materials, massing, and scale. 5. Make provision for transit. 6. Tie the development to a "built" Meadowcreek Parkway, not a "plan" for the Meadowcreek Parkway. 7. Have proffers that guarantee that the project will be an affordable housing project, even if the tax credits aren't achieved. 8. Make sure that dynamite/blasting concerns of neighbors are addressed. Key Map illustrating Treesdale Park location within the Jones and Jones Meadow Creeek Parkway study ,pea . ' , ! .:. '-" l '. , -./ , / -/': I ,f".' J , : i! . . , Attachment D : .; , / .I' ~~;r;:~V/~'~}> ' (j ^ .~ iI". _-;; , r ..:. ') ,'.'. ,- " :~ \ :{.. .-' ~,I' . :~, '\ i' :, :r""'" . \ .." , . ,: I" ~ ~ '" ~ ~ to ;r : :~, ,. H....., ~l:,. . \. ~. "'--\.- :>:. j ..;'~~~:'. --"'f f' ''';~''/' , ?/ ; (f . ~"-x.l '; ~'irt. ., ," ~.~/; /-..: " , " \ '.'. '1 ,.~, , " / .\ " . - N J"/ .', ...- -',,0~:-< " . r .;,),., ./ -- ..h r . / N' .,~ .,\ 1;-';'- N G I -:...- - ;';,;;/4~" '., i#!/~'" " <,./ . ':;.' _'j 'r" ~; '/ ./ :~ -- . ,,,.- --- .... /r ,iREfsd~RK ,:-)~ -\..".:\ ;-- /',:,' ..I" . .;-,: j , )~..... 1en1....SIll Pattem '",:"" '. '., ,/~ i :'.,'.;.' ' , ~ ;'? ...J. \ 1 - - IiiIIl - mn ... ....,~- .. r fll .... sw-e ...- .....1eInIIr lIuh._A ~1I..dI...ut /1 : " . ' ~ ' - . , ";;'" :1,;...... , ~ :' \: . i.., ,\ -,' \\ -, S'.: '\'" . ~ \ .' . i . , \ .; \ c ;} :~~\ \ \. ',~ "', ,0 '\ ,. " .\ '\ " ".,' \ ,. ~ , /' ~. .. t "',' 1. . \ ,\ , \ (\ \' '. ~.-:... ,.;fP":" .'~ ~ :,; r ," ,'_ ~'~t 1 . ') ,~. ---,t ,~~, ..y" ",. , p~r*') ) l.~ , \\ ~-- J /' /----- ',f :.:.... :,f I ct. . } I I i' " ". , I . '.. .;;.." ......~ I. ';- ;;" ',,:. Y'... ....,<~ ".I '~'. _,;; \. I ;i Y . ( . oJ , " ( '., .... Q - = ~ 5 -= ~ ~ - - -< .. ~ -- --" -._~ --- 53J.VDOSS\' ONn-nm<o I",'rtl 'wI I'!!.."" I. 'a..a ~./AeMlI.led lIaa.l:) MopealM ~U~WdOI~^~Q 6Uf.\SIX3-----____ __ wdOla^8a ueqJn ~^!+'oddns"---- \ AeMlIllH ! lJ.!lIiDnos ""lII011ON Jlld UIId..v! 81 JOp'.JJO:) A.EM>lJed ~~aJ:> Mope~w l!eAl OV),,_( ,y i / a6e~UOJd ./ pa:tu;:~po- u'2!J~sapad _<- Ja,ua:> ueqJn i ---AJepu03~S :' :,UIOd 46!H e~J\llueUW~"tl J leJnlln~!J6\1 ~6P3 /" a^!~el~6a1\ .' Ja,u~:> ueqm AJewud :,U!Od 46!H sdo,S llSUeJi lequa,od 'puoAaq pue eaJe aLJl U!LJl!M SUO!lOaUUOo leUO!leaJOaJ pue l!eJllue:j.Jodw! aP!AoJd PlnOM SlU!Od LJO!LJ uaaMlaq eaJe MOl aLJl U! aoeds uado aLJl pue AeM}JJed aLJl OU!pnIOU! SJOppJOO aoeds uadO 'ldaouoo aLJllo au!ds e WJOl Ol lUawdolaAap N.!SUalU! JaMOllO }JU!l OU!lOaUUOo e Aq pau!of aq PlnOM SJalUaO asaLJ.l 'SJalUaO aSn-paX!W 'ueqm AJepuooas pue AJewpd se pasodoJd aJe al!s aLJl uo SlU!od LJO!LJ OMl 'luawdolaAap le!luap!saJ JaLJlO pue ':)3.l\f:) '}JaaJ:) Mopeall\l 'peoH O!H 'peOJI!eJ OU!lS!Xa aLJl'AeM}JJed pasodoJd aLJl Aq paJapJOq eaJe aLJl JOl pasodoJd S! ldaouoo luawdo(aAap aLJ.l weJ6e!o lenJda3UO:) 'uO!lelnOJ!O Jelno!LJeA pue 'aoeds uado pue UO!lelnOJp ueplsapad 'uJaned luewdolaMp uuqJn aLJl :sluauodwoo o!l!oads 10 SUO!ld!JOSElp Aq P9MOIIOj ldaouoo lIeJaAO ue se lSJ!1 paqposap 5! aJay peplAOJd lda:;moo luawdolaAap ueqJn aLJ.l 'luawssesse IQlUeWYO,llAUe pue Ollldl;!JIJodln pue 'sluawssasse lS00 ;!UnlOnJlliiI.UIUI pue lUl}wdollMap 'sasAleue la'lJeW pUB Olwouooe 'IU~wdol~Mp YB!sap pal!elap e olloafqns eq Plnol.fs S$WSl/O$ lU~t.Udolr,AaP al!~ fl') sluawau!laJ aJl"l:\.n;j 'eWEl4os'V '^!I(;1UJi;tHV paJJalaJd l'l41 uo uO!leJoqela ue SI ~deouoo 1U9wdoliMap f)U!MOIIOJ l\t4J,. uor).d!J:>saa J.d3:>NO~ '.""- -f\) 'saJnleal U!eJJa1 aLJlLJl!M JapeJeLJo pue 'wJOl'aleos U! alq!ledwoo S! leLJl pue adeospuel OU!lS!xa aLJl spadsaJ leLJlluawdolaAap Mau aoemoou3 .. .AeM}JJed aLJ1 WOJl SMa!A a(qel!eAe AIMau UO aZ!lel!deo pue SMa!A OU!lSIXa aoueLJua pue paloJd .. 'seale padolaAap OU!lS!xa Ja4l0 Ol se lIaM se '}JleM JaAp euueAH:1 pasodoJd aLJl pue }JJed uad se LJons Sa!l!uawe UO!leaJOaJ pue }JJed ou!punoJms Ol pauuo:) .S4led a}J!q/ue!llsapad pue 'seaJe leJn1eu pue s}JJed 'AeM}JJed a4l ou!pn(Ou! 'Sa!l!Un:j.Joddo UOneaJoaJ pue aoeds uado LJllM luawdolaAap le!oJawwoo pue le!lUap!Sal aleJoalul '" 'seaJe uowwoo pue SJa1UaO lepJaWWoo 01 se lIaM 58 Ja4lo 40ea 01 seaJe (e!lUap!SaJ loauuoo Ol pue OU!l!AU! pOOLJJoq40!au aLJl a}Jew 01 ou!deospue( pue SaaJllaaJlS LJl!M saoeds o!lqnd pue sadeOS1aaJlS oU!leadde aleaJ:) e 'SPPlS!P le!luap!Sal-UOU pue seaJe le!luaplsaJ OUnS!xa 'SP004Joq4o!au Mau pauuoolI!M le4l SalnOJ l!sUeJl pue 'S41ed ueplsaped 'sAeMa}J!q 'slaaJlS 10 }JJOMlaU paJapJo ue 4S!lq9~S3 8 'Jaluao asn-pax!w e JOllIssew leO!l!JO" AJessaoou @i./l ap!AoJd 01 eaJe a(qedo(aAap alenbape S! aJa4lleLJl ElJnsu3 '" 'sUO!lnl!lSU! (emllno pue 'snO!O!laJ 'OlA!O pue 'luawAoldwa 10 saoeld 'sdoLJs 'saouap!saJ 10 dn epew SP004Joq4o!au pue seaJe asn-paxlw LJS!lqels3 Ii> 'pOOLJJoq40!aU a4l U! SlUap!SaJ lSOW JOl aOuelS!p OU!}JleM Asea U!LJl!M aq PlnoLJs SJalua:) 'seaJe (e!OOs pue le!oJawwoo lIews lO 'SJaluao Al!unwwOo 'slOOLJOS 'sezeld 's}JJed apn(Ou! Aew SJaluao asaLJ.l 'OUneoaJouoo JOl SlU!od leool JO SJaluao aAeLJ leLJl sP004JoqLJO!au pue SP!llsIP aleaJ:) '" 'AeM}JJed a4l OU!laploq sluawdolaAap aJnlnllo anleA lIelaAo a4l ou!oueLJua snLJl 'AeM}JJed a41 ouole aJa4dsoWle }JJed Jeau!l aLJl U!elU!el/\l . 'sa!lepunoq pau!J.ap Apealo pue SJaluaO OUOllS 4l!M san!unWWOo loedwoo aoeJnooua pealsu! :speoJ Jofew ouole (luawdo(aAap dplS) lUawdolaAap alAlS-Jeau!l aA!SSaOXa aoeJnoos!o . 'Apms SlLJ1 U! paluasaJd sldaouoo pue su..aned 1uawdolaAap a4l aouanllU! pue aU!J.ap Ol padla4 SaA!lOafqo asa4.l 'sluawdolaAap ueqJn alqe}JleM 'aA!SaLJoO 'asn pax!w JOl saomos snopeA WOJl UMeJp saA!pafqo 10 AJewwns e S! OUIMOIIOI a4.l SaA!:J.3a[qO 'pafOJd SaA!le!l!ul eaJ\f luawdolaAao a4l1o lapoll\l pOOLJJoqLJO!aN aLJl uI paq!losap se luawdolaAap asn pax!w pue Al!unWWOo 10 saldloupd aLJl Apoqwa pue oumas J!aLJllo SO!ls!lapeJeLJo reloads a4l WOJl aArOAa pue lOadsaJ PlnoLJs sluawau!laJ pue sueld luawdolaAap aJnln:l 'suo!l!puoo pue sla}JJew 'spaau ou!oueLJo uodn paseq Al!l!q!XaIJ luawdolaAap OU!MOlle al!LJM d!LJSJaUMO aldnlnw pue slaoJed ard!llnW sassedwooua 1e41 UJaned luawdol9Aap e JOl }JJoMaweJl e OU!p!AOJd 'lenldaouQo S! u6!sap 6u!MOIlOl a4.l II 'luaUJdOlt~Mp II!~U! UO S!Slnldwa ue LJl!M LJlMOJO aJnlnl s,AlUf\QO lil4l tJoddns Ol PtlUUflld alB saolAJaS pue 'Sa!l!lpel'Sf!lsn pue, ~o Alli)lJIM t! e,la4~ SI;1€}Jij'''" Ul mooo PlnoLJs 4lMOJ6 Sl;l~f1~~ 40!4M u~ld M!sY@ljtudwo:) Aluno:) allewaql\f a4~ 4i!M iU91SIl>l".Io\> S! ldt;louoo S!lIl 'sa!l!unpoddo UO!leaJoaJ pue ij\)~ds y{ldo JO l!J~.H.1JaOU~llU~ elH pue sadeoSPLle( 81\!1!suas jO IJoltoliliOJd liHH IHIM $~lllun:woddo luawdolaAap pue Al!Sl,Jep ~:Ju"',~q 01 fJI (lJfHj pt:llUij~HiiJd ldsouoo uOlsap ueqm aYl 10 lyallJ! !;l(,U 'fjly~ul'JdUJoo tl::HH::JfS u~do put:? 'LlOllt?IMOJP ue!llsapl'ld put;! f)~lq j>lJ~d J!:f;'}UII ~H lHIM AeM>f..H1d ~gfilJ~ MOpealt\l alH Joo YO!Hmol p€lgodoJd ~4l Aq p8u~lq5!alJ ^luO aJe sa!HunlJoddo ~6~ltl 'ij~jg Apn1fil t:l4l UllUtH.udolMap IHH:pn JOf peuwfj!sep $1li;lt1Jf!d p~YM{) AliI.ltlMlJd !O lU~l.udolaA8p pue 'yOIGep '6u!uuald a4l JOJ ~(jmunlJ(:)ddo t1lql1lnlM GW3 a.la4.l UOr).:3npOJlUI lN3Wd013^3Q N~aHn ~ .... c ~ S -= ~ ~ .... .... ~ --.... ~ '" -" -, iiill ~ 'S:U.\'I.JQSSv ((Nn'I~3::iO I:IIIIIIIA'IIU.'IIIW,.A'UIII:I .~i ~/AelllUl.led lIIaa.l:) MOpeew ~:~,-- --.....::::~:'\ ~,., , ~J '~',~;).{~~t'f ~t.\ .""...~ '" ,..~.- " .~ ~ J " .......... ! I ."ISI.II.IDlIIIa.1 IUIII IflOllllJllPil ..... "'I"S~- qlq.....P. == 1It....1I' ....;;...... -.,.,...'.. uOll8ln~Jl3 JeIQ:lJll8A f' luawdoluao ueq.lR " -,'. .' , fllllllll. ;F ~II'I"~". . I . ~. /-........ ", .II. ~-~ if . .-. .Ii / ~"" ,1 \ jl't . ...' ~ . , " I / I "'-. ., l "'-. IJ \ ______--/. '.. 1\ I j-- : \ ,1I11IlItIllIlIDIIIIHIIIHlIIIII I \ \ <: HlslPftllfll!.... _ ........ ......... <> ~ SfIIt...... .... I dq.90 , ..J.....,.. Ou.... ~ .lI&l.ltlllfQA...."..1lI8 --__ ; "...... - - - , -... - 1I1A1pd lilillllfiil :&ll8IlSPlII'/klI-IlaJIIHP'd .....- l"IoUOOtlllllUlall~' -.... 8:tedS uado '2 U"ll8lll1Ul3 UII!lIS8P8d IUawdolaAaO ueqJD 'ade::>spuel JapeOJq a4l Ol SUOn::>aUUO::> pue 'S4led Ueplsapad 'S)j::>Olq luawdolaAap SaU!}ap )jJOMlaU S!41 'A4deJ60dol Aq pa!}!pOW pp6 e }O WJO} a4l U! pasodoJd aJe SlaaJlS JOpalU! a41 61- 'luawdolaAap 84l }O pua UJa4lnOS a4lle OMl Alq!SSOd pue pua UJa4UOU a4lle UO!paSJalU! auo :peol:! O!l:! WOJ} pap!AoJd aJe SlU!Od ssa::>::>e JOfelN 'AeM)jJed a4l WOJ} pau,!wJad lOU S! eaJe luawdolaAap ueqJn a4l Ol ssa::>::>e Jeln::>!4aA l::>aJ!a 'suJaued luawdolaAap Ol adeLJs saA!6 se lIaM se UO!lelUapO Ol salnqpluo::> oSle SlaaJlS pue SpeOJ }O WalsAs aA!Sa40::> 'if 'ssa::>::>e JOl )jJOMlaU leUOn::>Unl e SaP!AoJd 'SUO!l::>aSJalU! J!aLJl pue 'SlaaJlS 'SpeOJ 'AeM)jJed lO WalsAs le::>!4::>JeJa!4 e lO WJOl a4l U! 'UO!leln::>J!::> Jeln::>!4a^ UO!Jeln:lJIO Jeln:l!4a^ Ij I, J I '. '~ I ,( )' . \\, ../) 1 ~ .'~ (' N " '" m 1(iI.... .J t.:.;."".t~~. -........... / "~,'~i';{~ _1j'//7' _i\,"'~"'" ,./~.'.\ (. . "",:.\.:;;. \ \ ~. , N " ,,. m ~ .<~ I>' (--'. .,~r :i!". /' ~'" , -~->. ! ,y' .I .-' ....I,::{ ., -.......... Ii,. tG.it . ~."":,.' l: -, !> ,\ 1118lll~~1S1I1 ..... lII:lIdSuHO ~Illdupqq'uwaa 11II11 . jlllllllllllwo.lUnealllljpllW UJVjlIlIlIl*'IUIQIIIlq.lQ waned IUlIWdol8AaQ ueq.q) , 'pueJ aLJl Ol "lll" pue JapeH!LJ::> a::>eld sa::>JOlU!aJ leLJl WalsAs a::>eds uado pala::>emlnw e Ol alnqpluO::> PlnOM lie 'Sa!l!A!pe UO!leaJ::>aJ JOJ se lIaM SB UO!palOJd Ma!A pue 'Wl!qeLJ al!IPI!M 'UO!le!peWElJ Jlo-unJ JOl seaJe a::>eds uado 6u!z!mn pue JOppJO::> peol:! O!l:! a4l 6uOle slueuwaJ leJnlln::>p6e 6U!AJ~SeJd 'SEl!l!Ienb ade::>spuel O!SUPlU! 6u!ls!xe 4l!M l!:J. nnrl. sl$Ol'lds uedo to UOneeJO e4l S! OOl os 'lueuodw! ~! PUBI al.l~ 0:\ aA!l!SUaS S! leLJl Jal::>eJeLJ::> pue a6eUJII~Jrl~Ofn!40JB ue 6u!leaJ::> al!4M 'SlU8walw aAllfilJdJEllU! pu~ 'Slu!odMa!A 'a::>uelS!SSe 6u!pU!lAeM '6Ul'J6lii apnltJU! plnoo pUB walsAs LJled )jJed lua::>efpe a4~ llllM lP9UUOO SlIled esell.L 'sa::>eds uedo lO sa6pa a4l pue lU@wdOIGMP ~O sepepunoq JalnO 84l aUllap dla4 PlnOM S4H1d 'SI!9Jl Ul3Plsapad pue a)j!q pue S)jleM8p!s SnOnu!luo::> pue 'SlaaJlS palUepO-Uli1!.nseped 'sezeld pue s)jJed /eWJOl apnpu! eaJe luawdolaAep ueqJn pesodoJd 84l U! slu8wala Aa)/ 'puoAaq walsAs l!eJl pue )jJed J86Jel a4lLJl!M S)jU!1 sap!AoJd pue eaJe luawdolaAap ueqm e4l U!4l!M walsAs UO!leln::>J!::> e SaleaJ::> SJOppJO::> a::>eds uado pue s4led ueplsapad lO )jJOMlaU V a3eds uadO pue UO!:a.eln:)J!:) Ue!.I:g.sapad 'eaJe a4llnOLJ6noJLJl walsAs l!eJl pue 4led paleu!pJOo::> e lO UO!leaJ::> aLJl pue luawdolaAap leuo!l!ppe JOl Al!UnlJoddo a4l sJallO pue padOlaAapJapUn S! E auoz 'aW!l JaAO padOlaAapaJ aq Ol pal::>adxa aq ue::> pue 'padOlaAapJapun S! 'd!LJsJauMO ald!llnW U! S! 'JaAaM04 'l auoz 'awn auo W padOlaAap aq Aew pue d!LJSJaUMO al6u!s U! AlluaJJn::> S! L 8UOZ U! eEue aLJ1 'lu8wdolaAap S!LJl ap!n6 Ol )jJOMaweJl wJal-6uOI e se paMelA aq PlnoLJs aJaLJ UMOLJS ueld a41 'aw!llo poped e JaAO eoeld 6U!)jel'lelUaWaJ::>u! aq Ol Ala)j!llSOW S! eaJB alqedolGAeP aJ!lua aLJllo lno-Pl!ng 'spua 4lnos pue 4UoU a4ll!1 peol:l O!l:! J.o HO In::>::>O luawdolaAap a4l OlU! "sAeMale6" JO SaOUeJlua AJeWPd ,,'AIPU8PJ. -ueplsapad" aq Pln04s lie lnq uo!punJ. J.O slaAal 6u!JaH!p aAe4 PlnoM slaaJlS 'luawdolaAap 8tH Ol uo!sa40::> pue aJm::>nJls saA!6 'sa6ue4::> ::>!4deJ60dol Ol peldepe 'waned laaJlS pappp6 Alfe!ued V 'luawdolaAap le!luap!SaJ Alpewpd 'Al!suap-JeMOI S! luawdolaAap Al!suap-46!LJ a4l 6u!punoJJns .seaJe 6u!punoJJns OllOol Aq alq!ssa::>::>e Al!peaJ pue eaJe luawdolaAap aLJl U!LJl!M pale::>ol AlleJlua::> aJe sdOllf!LJ pue 'U!eJJallUaoefpe JaAO SMa!A po06 spJoHe punoJ6JaLJ6!LJ 'Sa!l!suap JaLJ6!4 Ol pal!ns Jaueq s! sadolS aleJapow OllLJ6!1s lO ALJdeJ60dol aLJl 8sne::>aq sdom!LJ aLJl uo papuawwo::>aJ S! luawdol8Aap Jesuaa 'luawdolaAap asn-pax!w lO Al!Suap LJ6!LJ AI8A!lBlaJ e Aq pa!dn::>::>o pue sezeld JO s)jJed Aq paJoLJ::>ue LJ::>ea 'SJalua::> OMl punOJe saAIOAaJ luawdolaAap palsa66ns a4l 'Molaq weJ6e!p aLJl uo UM04s sv UJaned JuawdOIf)Aaa ueq..ln . . . A TT ACHMENT E Comments from VDOT 11-1-07 ZMA-2004-00022 Treesdale Park Proffers Elaine, I have reviewed the proffers for the above rezoning application and have the following comments: I had previous concerns with the location of the bus turnout on Rio Road with weave problems and sight distance issues. I met with the applicant and it is my understanding that the bus turnout would be an easement only at this time and construction of the turnout would only be considered when Meadowcreeek Parkway was in place and the traffic on Rio Road was lower. The proposed right of way on Rio Road needs to be one foot behind the sidewalk to ensure maintenance and sight distances. The improvements to Rio Road need to be in accordance with VDOT standards, not a private street. The last paragraph of section 2 states either public or private but Rio needs to be to VDOT standards. If you have any questions, please call me. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 joel. denunzio@vdot.virginia.gov .;S I EXHIBIT F Comments from ACSA - 11/5/07 Treesdale would generate 26,730 gallons per day. 40,000 gpd is the tipping point for capacity certification from RWSA, so they are well under. Water is available. We have no real comment on the ZMA. Water and sewer construction drawings will have to be reviewed and approved prior to tentative site plan approval. Any connection to a RWSA utility requires their approval. One other comment: Water and/or sewer connections to the ACSA system are allotted on a first- come, first served basis. The ACSA does not reserve capacity in its system for a specific project. Approval of water and/or sewer utilities for this project does not constitute a guarantee of future service. G. M. Whelan, LS Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 (434) 977-4511 Fax: (434) 979-0698 32" S :.Y.' .... f"('; ~ '" ~ MiHI~ D VINI~~I^ '31~V\III381V ::10 AlNnO:) 0 0 a SUDld UOflD:J!fddV VVVI as tE .::: II Ul ::. to) fi .j I ~ 0 :t: I ~ )l~'v' d 31'v'OS33~1 u V') U .... , d! q ~ :!! .> '0 . -g ~ OJ .~ c Ii >< UJ o ?; .!1 c u ~ x ,g '0 . Ii: ~ - a.... - :r: ~ <( " ,:';-:-T:- - E r' <( I 0 g . ~ ih 0> ;): ii, a.. 0 If 1 ~ a.... -+- Z C W Q) ~..... E ~~ e: ....J Q) Z!a > o~ <( 0 j::::'( '<(ac ~ u~ Q. !a E -~ &~ 0 0> '<(Q c ~ac: .- ~ CI) V') ::> 0 W :r: Q) W "'t:: 0 ~ E Q) .0 I- <( 0000-0 t8 033~3~ I </) .',.' IllElEl... !I ( ~ 'J- ~n ~~~ , ..0 o '0 N N I U M.. ~i p 1-- j, D ~j If"~: ~ 8~ ~. ~i'~ ~ n h ~ 1 "'" j~ q H~~~ >- a.: l::: ~ ~ ?i ~ o lX:l z '---... '-J Nl . J o .. '" o SUDld uOUD::>!lddy YWZ )I~\f d 31\fOS33~1 " o :ia > ~ .li o a MM__..----..---- ____""_ 63\ $t,g~'~fII'l!Il; ,~) tlliQ~"',Q,,'e3I> ~~1~~ l3l(~ ~ij;B. ell" " \ICfD ,/ ~~'f ~.It . ::::--- /"'. : ! ( - -~~ 9~ia ~.... I~ ~ I ~!.d~ ..~ i~ lil. ~ i~~ \ ~ I -..~ii~-. 9-0/1 ~I~ ~ ..~. I ~ -"--:~:I~ i~~I. 9~I~i ~!1$l'IiIB ~~ .' Ull~ ..:;:....---- ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ll~~ ~ .~ ~n F 9;~1: I c./ /' .' / xl1 '" I l' 9;". It ~I:j .,/' /..A"A / ./.'#.."//" '." . <1,' ^ / / "',I'" .' '. .' #..-1'./ ^ / -1./. .t.,V"/" .~. . <1 . Ii / ./. #..://.... 2illll~ // ," \ ~~13 / it. \ I~;I~! ----.--..-1. ~llaIII " ___~JtTI \ .--..--.- -.. '"7~~..~ II -.. '~~=-..j, 1\ H-YllaIII \ 'i I -"~:aIII ..~ ~\ II ! 'JD1. .~;;I ---.;nA--; ..)) ~U ~ -"-"- -4 (/ ~ ~ 1I1;YM, alii : ,}) ~ ---~-::---1 ~ !r;, =~-~:~..j ;f' -"- ~,.. rl_llaIII ../ ..\ rlJD1 I) =....2~....J It V ! "-+-YII alii / . VI JD1 !Ii g I ~~ ~III ~; -11..1-5151 r ' I ~;; I I Ij ) It It !~ ~~ I.~~I .i 'l'l' i~:a! ai :jil . II :;;, lltlh ~~ . ~- . ~. - C C U __ VI_ i I ! di~..U l&il ~IU l!l!!! ~ It I2It i ~ I Ill! ~ If~~ a;;gli ,r-I@ ~ I~ .l'~ ~! ~ I~:: . I -.. ~-::--l' II JD1 -"~-;;;;"l' t1JD1 -.--..-..--..., ........ "_llaIII / ......... II JD1 '"", : "'" /f/~' ""'. I Ii """, "~"", 'j: I "'" ~" """, ~/.""'. c "-- I~~"~ '"'--.y: ill~~ '-..." """, I~~"", ''''--,/ Ii l'i ""- """, / J;lf~ ~ '. .'"", . ral~~ ~.. ""-. . Ii~ ,--" ~"'" '" J / . / !II . I~ Ii / ~) ~~;~ . ,I;i .I ar~ 1n l~ i~ .. .~ ~-. ~" ~ E ~E!= ! ! I I I~ i ~ II I I Ii i .. 91. Ii! Il!I 5 ;1 55 I I I~ i;~ ~I ., ;b Ii Ii '''. '" '" ......... MiUI~ 8 U ..- !l ~I' II~ U I q ~ ~~ i~ .~ h 1'] H !! _r~ H~ -DO f]] it! i~~ Hl ~q l~~ El1 l 13 8 i;!! I!~~ Hu ]!~~ iili ~HJ 2":..0 lli 1~ I ~H H ~~i~ ~i 1 -Q.2a "€l 1 lizi h ~ ~ _ L o' ~ .U! '. , ~2l!; fIi '! i:ll: a-o~ ~ Hg I iH! ~ai~ Hi i ~ U~E~ ,~l .. "5 !c"Ull 8 i 5 ~ ! 'F~' f~i 1 ~ h~ll ~11 i h Hlzi I~~ " <~ "..,!l 0'0.8 - CI( Zf!;: l~~ : l~ l~!~j Pi 1 ~o ~_I . ~ ~ l~. ~ t~ ~ _ 1~'hE l~l ~ H fH)ljl!H t li ~"j:l~ i1:~ ! ~& 11~i~1 fl~ ! H ~ai h ~ h ~ :::8 ~< " " :< ~ 6 . ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i) .& h~ H~ :n~ ~!i ~,' '1' iH hi ! ~ j g ., ~ ~ _&;;; ~ J ~6!~r:;; ~ ~~ ~~f.i~ i~h .O~-~ z~- JHii p~~ "Uo< ",~=.s [] .::J f.{....\ -.0 o ..,. o """"" I U :2: o >==2: ~~~ Q:'Cl.. CL <( VINI€>~I^ '31~VW3alV ~o AlNno:) SUOld uO!Jo:::>!Idd\f a~d \fWZ )I~V d 31VOS33~1 · I \d\\lihlUn\ \. ro ~~ 11. l~1 Blf siX h~ ; r,~ , E '! ~:!O ~ g. ~ Ii' .to~'i ~ z-1~ Iv3~ g [!! it .. 0 -6. ~ ; if" t!lff H~~~ .: ~~~~ ! j !"[ ~ u~td ot!fi~ ~,iiH o Ii l-. iH.H 8" I zll HHli jl~~:l , '~~Jt '1Hz ~ Q.~-3"t1 l~u]L . ~5P~1 ] o!! o~ 50!! jl .<ll"" ~ hoi;Ui ~ ;!~!5=1~ ~ ~~ I~ 1212 U~ 5l..~, , , , ~'I:ir ~ I J I /11, I'" 1111 II11 III1 I111 I\lll 'III :J'(\\ " :__::i ~ o . i l i z 't I ~ i 1 II H ,; '0-& Z n i ~] 1i~- ~ .~~ jig ~ ~5 iH ~ ~f '" '6 ~ 1 ~ I ~ . n H .~ ~" n II -i.1! i~ c. Ii i~l ~~. l!~ O'i~ l~c ,<l i i . ! ~rH HH ii~~ HH f till 2 i ~~~ i a 1 " - ~ 10 !81 .i~~-" ~& iu~l !i: ~ q I, H~ .g-e '2 ~ ~~"O fHH Hi 2 I: ~ ~ ~ !, ~ ~ ~~ j ot '._ Hhi ;ri~PI t~tii; . h~;; ;;~I:l~ ;~~1f ~"i;~ :~H~ J! J I ~". ~ ~ ~ ;~ 1 I 1!1 ! ~ ~ ~~ I ,_ t!' .',' ~ f_~ 1 ~ 1! .~1" . o' < . 0 ~~ J! i I i~.~ ~ ~ :!l: %:~ c 8' ~ e 5 15~1 lf~ ~ i g ~!~t fr . ~i'l I I Z J i ~ ~ ;,j I ;;I~~ ;;1.1 I ~ .' i.. g,H ~!~ ~ ! ] "JH J- ~,~ ~=s": ~=s 1 i ~ . ~~ . 8 tH Hn ~~l ~ ~ < "~ M lit I~ -~. [J- ~ fl. ; : w!IQ. ,e' ' j!; 13 - , : VINI~~I^ '31~VW391V ::10 AlNnO:J SUDld uOUD::>!Idd'v' a~d 'v'VYI )l~'v' d 31'v'OS33~1 0:Z:~ 2:0CQ'" i=:i=: j: ~ C5(j~o 0...:::;:z:2: ~&::s "<l "'<(0... ~rg .~ is IJJ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Cl..-I o~ lEa: i lEa: ""'IJJ ~ I · ""'IJJ i <2S ~ ~ 0 lXlD.. ~~ 0 ~a: J ~ II: II: QD.. j.;~ 0 i:;D.. 0 ~ffi a: @~ a: U) .. :l ~ 0~ Z I-I:!: ~ . tll~ ~::l 0 ~~ ~@ 01JJ 01JJ I-- -II:!: -II:!: ~ .. ~ U _a: _a: LJ...I ~~ ~~ U) I .. U) :l U) 0 G:: U 0 <( ~ ~ 0 ~ l:; ~ r-~ -I -I G:: ~ ~ 0 ~ i ~ i ~~ 0 ~o 0 - II: II: G:: i=:D.. 0 i:;a: 0 ~~ C,)D.. a: IJJ~ a: . q . ;0 .. , tu~ ~ ~ 01JJ ~ ~ . f~ ~5 f~ p ~~ ~o 01JJ 00 ~I:!: (!l~ ~j.; j.;a: j.;a: ~~ ~~ .. .. .ii c ;: "'t I U -.() o en \'- '''f' I~n-;~ [J ~ j' I~ .. ; ~dni;~ ; VINI~~I^ '31~VW381V ::10 AlNno:J SUDld uOUD:::>!IddV a~d 'v'WZ )I~\f d 31\fOS33~1 @-..IY) t)~ ~ ~~o ~(Jvl '" 0 0 , L() '" CvJ I 0(1 U . / l8J \. 2 ~ ~ ~ 2 ;; 1 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ i " i ,; I II , < 0 ~ E~ ~ 1i~ l~ ~ "" II i 0_ ,0 ! ., ., . .- '8 ;i ~ i u ~~ ~ ! .~ J ~ H ~ ~, " ~~ Attachment IV . Original Proffer: December 12,2007 PROFFER FORM Date: December 12, 2007 ZMA # 2004-022 Tax Map and Parcel Number(s): 61-182; 61-183; and 61-183A 6.646 Acres to be rezoned from R-4 to PRD (Planned Residential Development) in conjunction with the "Application Plan," sheet C-4.0 of the Treesdale Park ZMA Application Plan package prepared by the Cox Company, last revised on November 20, . 2007 and with Proffer Attachment 1 (see Sheet A-1.0 on page 7 ofthese proffers). Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable. 1. Maximum Residential Density. The number of residential dwelling units that may be developed in Treesdale Park shall not exceed 90 units. 2. Road Improvements. Applicant (also referred to herein as the "Owner") shall cause completion of the following road improvements: . A. Rio Road Improvements and Internal Connections. The Owner shall dedicate public right-of-way and construct all public road improvements and internal private connections to the signal at Pen Park Lane shown on Attachment 1 (Sheet A-1.0). Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 1 The Owner shall dedicate land fronting Rio Road from the northern property line to the Treesdale Park entrance for the construction of a deceleration/turn lane into the project. The Owner shall also dedicate land fronting Rio Road from the Treesdale Park entrance to the southern property line for the construction of a deceleration/turn lane which is shown on Attachment 1 (Sheet A-1.0). B. Proposed Signal at the Stonewater Entrance and Rio Road/Pen Park Lane Intersection. Within 30 days after VDOT determines that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of the Stonewater Entrance and Rio Road/Pen Park Lane, the Owner shall make a cash contribution to the County equivalent to its one-third share of the total costs associated with the design, installation of all required signals at Rio Road and Pen Park Lane and all associated intersection improvements. C. The Owner shall not request that a certificate of occupancy be issued for any building in Treesdale Park prior to the completion of the improvements and the ~edication of land and public improvements delineated in Proffer 2(A) and shown on Attachment 1 (Sheet A-1.0). 3. Affordable Housing. The Owner shall provide affordable housing (as described herein) ("Affordable Units") equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total residential units constructed on the Property, in the form of for-rent apartments. Each subdivision plat and site plan for the Property, other than those executed for purposes other than the creation of housing units, shall designate the units that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein. Affordabilitv: Rental Rates. For the purposes of this Proffer 3, "Affordable Units" shall mean rental units which have gross rents (rent plus tenant-paid utilities) that do not exceed 120% of Fair Market Rents published by the U.S.. Department of Housing and Urban Development (RUD); provided that, in each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this Proffer 3, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utility costs. Term. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent affordable units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this Proffer 3 shall apply for a period of fifteen (15) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by Albemarle County for each for-rent affordable Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 2 LIt) . unit, or until the units are sold as low or moderate cost units qualifying as such under the County's Affordable Housing Policy. Conveyance of Interest. All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this Proffer 3. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Tern1 shall contain a complete disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this Proffer 3. At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest (other than for the securing of a mortgage or deed of trust) in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the Albemarle County Chief of Housing in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this Proffer 3 have been satisfied. . Reporting Rental Rates. During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days after the commencement of the lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the Owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the lease. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the Owner shall provide to Albemarle County, if requested, any reports, copies of lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as Albemarle County may reasonably require. 4. Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway Trail Easement Dedication. The Owner shall dedicate to public use land within a 30-foot wide access easement to Albemarle County for a "greenway trail". This greenway trail shall serve as a pedestrian path through the Property connecting to the section of the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway trail, and its alignment and layout shall be in general accord with the schematic design depicted on the Application Plan. The ultimate design and location of the trail shall be established by the Director of Planning in consultation with the Director of Parks and Recreation and shall provide access to the Meadow Creek Parkway Greenway. If the Greenway trail easement is not dedicated by the first final subdivision plat, the Owner shall be responsible for the cost of a survey and preparing the deed and plat to convey the Greenway trail easement to the County before the first final site plan approval. After it is dedicated to public use, the Greenway Trail and all land within the access easement shall continue to be included in the total area of open space and amenities within the Property. . If the owner of the adjacent property, Tax Map 61 Parcel 84, dedicates to public use a Greenway trail easement that would serve as a substitute for the Greenway trail easement described in this proffer to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning in consultation Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 3 L/ j with the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to approval of the first final subdivision plat or site plan on the Property, then this proffer shall be deemed satisfied. 5. Transit Reservation Area. The Owner shall reserve an area for a bus pull-off from Rio Road within the northeast portion of the site, within the common open space area located directly to the east of Building 1 in general accord with the Application Plan. Should fixed-route bus service associated with the Charlottesville Transit Service (CTS) ever be extended to serve the section of Rio Road adjacent to the site, upon demand of the County, the Owner, at its own expense, shall construct the bus stop to accommodate a bus pulling off Rio Road and picking up riders in a dedicated lane located within the Property. In conjunction with the bus pull-off area, the Owner shall also construct a small transit shelter to complete the bus stop. The specific design standards of the bus pull-off and the shelter shall be determined by VDOT, CTS, and the Director of Community Development within sixty days of the County's formal request for the transit stop. In the absence of any fixed-route service, Treesdale Park shall be designed to accommodate the CTS On-demand Link or JAUNT service within the community as a means of providing public access to residents per the existing programs. 6. Off-Site Improvements. The Owner shall provide stormwater management within the area depicted on the Application Plan which may also be used as a shared stormwater management and Best Management Practices (BMP) facility to serve both Treesdale Park and the development of Tax Map 61-84. No final site plan shall be approved until all easements necessary for the off-site improvements shown on the Application Plan have been recorded. These off-site improvements include grading, stormwater management, construction of an accessway to the stormwater management facility and transportation improvements to the intersection of Rio Road and Pen Park Lane. 7. EarthCraft Standards for Multifamilv Development. The Owner shall cause all multifamily buildings within the Project to be designed and constructed so as to be rated a minimum of "Certified" under the EarthCraft Green Building Rating System for multifamily development, as set forth in the EarthCraft House Technical Guidelines, version November, 2006. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Owner shall submit a certification from the EarthCraft certified project architect to the Director of Community Development that the building plan meets the EarthCraft standards. Before the Owner requests a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a licensed Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12,2007 Page 4 f' ".., i ,/ &., t- . architect rendered such a certificate, the Owner shall submit to the County's Director of Community Development documentation that the building is EarthCraft certified. 8. Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. In order to provide a higher level of Erosion and Sediment Control than is required by current State and Local regulations, the Owner shall adopt construction procedures and practices that provide additional soil stabilization measures to achieve permanent stabilization immediately upon reaching final grades, but no more than six months from the start of construction. These procedures and practices shall include: Utilize wire reinforced silt fence rather than standard silt fence. Immediately upon reaching final grade, utilize permanent seed and matting to stabilize all slopes steeper than 3 H: 1 V. Stablize with temporary seeding all disturbed areas that are not at final grade but will remain dormant longer than 14 days. Place fencing prior to the start of construction around areas to be conserved. Other measures deemed better or equivalent by the County Engineer. A. B. C. D. . E. . Submitted as of the I,;"-\"'- day \)a:ev.--a~ ,2007, by: [REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK; SIGNATURE P AGES TO FOLLOW.] 1J2.. i - "../ Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 5 ALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, INC. a Virginia nonstock, 501(c)3 non-profit corporation By: Its ~tive Direc~ j BY:~t1fJ$ Its: E'll ~cu--t-; "..tL~i V"'e...c..to r Date: I 'L . 0 -:) - 2-00 '1 Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 6 f "1'1 . -- . PROFFER ATTACHMENT 1 (SHEET A-1.0) Treesdale Proffers (ZMA# 2004-022) December 12, 2007 Page 7 Lj~; li1j,-" II ,n IMlldlll~!,D VINIOlllA '31l1VV'1391V ~o A.LNno:) SUDld UOJ.lD:J!/dd'v' mid 'v'WZ )I~'v'd 3WOS33~1 i , I ~\' \ ! \ \ I " \ \ \ I \- \'! , J \ \ \. V I _--------j \ /1 -.-.-=;.. , i '\ ( i -'" ~ ~1'1 ..--, " I!: i (! J i ,---.. J I ~I ,:./ .> ::.~:=~,. II !' , : I ...... :~~:::.- :,1 II I ';----'j, ~"! I h '-......; i I ::i .1 "/ i I / ), ';'f--f-1I1 /1 " I f U I .L' a \' I ~\ It ~ ~ \ \i ~ \, \:! 1/ ':-" \ W '~L_. \ ~ I . ',I i ~"'\ I - ~~\, ' '''''-" ' ' ""~,,-, ' " '-.- , \ @ wi 3 ----zBtn/\ .;^It:lU / Cb I \ L. i. I ~d z '<:~~ ' ~ \ ~ ijI I ~~gji , i Q.~ \ ~ e I i ~ . I / , " \..~..-' , t::j' r.J - .______! \ t"'--; U ,'--.. \ 1\ -.--,' L....:.;rJ I \ -- ,.~:,.,_ -., ..... . ~~:,~:::" I' ;~'.:::',L:,: ~ 4=::;; - ~_~ . 4~"- i ;E r- g{ :::=::- ;' ; ~:~T~ I 8 ':--~ ~ / ' f ,t- ...,:--....."1 .---.-..: rh...._.. r j r-.--... , I ........_.1 t'....._( .-.._-....~ r.h....... I : :...........1....: .:............. ;"1., '" lit; . . . 1. Staff approval of a revised plan showing a) Landscaping consistent with condition 1 (a) of SP 2007-00021 b) Parking stops as approved by the County Engineer .. The motion for approval passed by a vote of 5:0. (Mr. Morris and Mr. Strucko were absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that SDP-2007-00095 and SP-2007-00021, Beth Goldstein (Yoga Meditation Studio), would go before the Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2007 with a recommendation for approval. ZMA-2004-00022 Treesdale Park (SiQn # 33) PROPOSAL: Rezone 6.60 acres from R4 residential zoning district which allows residential uses (4 units per acre) to PRO (Planned Residential District) - which allows residential uses (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses. This request proposes a total of 90 units at a density of 14 units per acres and no commercial uses. PROFFERS: Yes. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential (6 - 34 units per acre). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: The property is located in the Rio Magisterial District at 640 E. Rio Road, south of Towne Lane on the west side of East Rio Road. TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 61, Parcels 182,183, and 183A. (Elaine Echols) Mr. Echols presented a power point presentation and summarized the staff report. (See staff report.) This is the project for Treesdale Park, which the Commission has seen previously. The property is zoned R-4. The Comprehensive Plan designates this parcel as Urban Density Residential and the applicant would like zoning that is more in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan. The project was submitted in December, 2004 and over 2005 the applicant met with residents on the project, worked on it a little bit more and held work sessions with the Commission on October 31, 2006'and August 28,2007. AHIP is the owner. The request is to rezone 6.6 acres to PRO foot 14 dwelling units per acre. It is obviously much higher on a net density because most of the rear of the parcel is not developed. One hundred percent of the units will be for families of up to 60 percent of the median household income. It is an affordable housing project. The application plan was reviewed. The parking is relegated. Earlier proposals had a different orientation of these particular buildings. There is a greenway easement in the back proposed. There have been a number of issues and concerns over the last few years. · One was tree preservation, the relationship to nearby properties, traffic on Rio Road before the Meadowcreek Parkway improvements, architecture and greenway dedication, which would be an easement for a greenway as well as a commitment for access through an adjoining parcel. · She pointed out the proposed location of the stormwater management facility. They talked about stairs that would go up to the parking lot being of some concern earlier. The applicant is proposing to put some access to the adjoining parcel at this location. · The Parkway comes back into property and will have to cross the other parcel in order to get onto the AHIP parcel. They have had some thoughts about the appropriateness of having this trail be back behind the development and more out of sight than perhaps it ought to be. Staff has talked to Parks and Rec and they were totally unaware that the adjoining parcels, called Stonewater, might be able to work in conjunction with Treesdale to have a better location for the greenway, which is discussed further in the staff report. · Another issue has to do with access to this parcel. In order for this property to develop it needs access to this parcel to the light that would be put in. There are some relationships between these 2 parcels that both owners of the property have been working together on. Staff believes ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 4 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN . that they are working on getting that commitment in their proffers. This project is totally dependent on the access through the adjoining parcel. . Dealing with terrain has also been an issue with this particular project. The staff report speaks to some concerns about the use of retaining walls. One of the real challenges when there is steep terrain is that to avoid doing a lot of grading one ends up having to put in some retaining walls. By avoiding grading it has resulted in some fairly tall retaining walls that staff has some concerns with. . Since the last time the Commission reviewed this proposal the applicant has been working on resolving the issues that were outstanding. They are now showing the limits of disturbance on the plan. They are limiting the building heights. They changed the orientation of the buildings. The applicant has no control over Meadowcreek Parkway, but the County is committed to build it to Melbourne Road and going out to bid in 2008. Access is guaranteed to the adjoining property or the development can't take place. . They have provided some proffers for taking extra measures to where the neighbors are blasting and the use of equipment near the adjoining property. . The architecture has not been addressed. Unfavorable Factors: . The retaining walls. . No architecture commitments. . The County can't guarantee the Meadowcreek Park construction prior to occupancy. . There are some concerns about the blasting provisions being enforceable. The Zoning Department believes they can enforce these particular provisions. But, James Barbour with Fire & Rescue is here and can talk to us about the different things that Fire & Rescue does as it relates to blasting to see if there is a need for anything more than what they can provide. . Favorable Factors: . The project provides 100 percent of affordable housing, which is different from what they saw last time when the applicant was proffering 15 percent affordable housing. The Commission felt that if they did not get the tax credits that they were looking at for this program that it needed to have a higher level of providing affordable housing. . The density is in keeping with the land use plan. . The project meets all of the applicable principles of the Neighborhood Model. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors should only approve it when they get the provision of the easement of the binding agreement with the adjoining owners, when the applicant provides some architecture commitments and qualifications of the drawings that they have provided and provide for terrace walls or at least leave open the opportunity that the plan could change and provide terraced walls; allow for the greenway easement on the adjoining property; and a decision needs to be made on the appropriateness of the blasting proffer. James Barbour, of Fire Rescue and Glenn Brooks, County Engineer are present to answer questions. Ms. Joseph asked if there were any questions. Mr. Edgerton asked staff to point out where the retaining walls would be located and where they would propose terracing. Ms. Echols pointed out that the retaining walls were located at the back of the parking lots. . With the retaining walls staff is concerned with the safety of children. There will be guard rails out there at 18' to 25', which is fairly tall. Terracing in that area will require additional grading. But, there is going to be some grading in the area anyway. Staff believes that if it is a question of preserving trees and not grading they would have a preference that there would additional grading for the retaining walls. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 5 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN Mr. Edgerton asked if the additional grading would have to be in critical slopes. Ms. Echols replied that there were critical slopes in the back of the property. Mr. Edgerton said that for that trade off they would have to destroy more critical slopes, and Ms. Echols replied that was correct. Ms. Joseph opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission. Mike Fenner, of Cox Company represented the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, said that the members of their team present included Teresa Tapscott, Joyce Dudek, Kirk Hesecker and Bruce Woodell. . Staff has done a good job of articulating the changes they have made to the plan and proffers since the last meeting. They have worked hard with staff on bringing a better plan before the Commission. The biggest change is in the proffer for the 100 percent affordable housing. They plan to provide 90 affordable housing units. The previous proffer before them was a 15 percent. They are comfortable with the conditions outlined by Ms. Echols and certainly with respect to the agreement. The agreement outline is attempting to speak to the issue with respect to the shared BMP facilitator. The facility was located in 2 separate locations previously. They noted the wetland issue, which was addressed in the last work session in the easterly direction. So they have moved the facility to one shared facility to the west of where it was shown previously. That is sized appropriately to serve both Treesdale and the Stonewater facility that is planned towards the south. . Other changes they have made are that they have shown a directional island that would prohibit anything beyond a right in and right out of the Treesdale proposed facility. VDOT has weighed in and said that a median would not be acceptable there so as not to prohibit existing residents across Rio Road from making that left hand turn out onto Rio Road heading towards the city. The directional island is a compromise and one in which they have acknowledged that opposed folks could attempt to make the left out. They feel that is an appropriate design solution to force people to follow AHIP's direction all along, which is a right in and a right out only facility. So the agreement is not a problem at all. . Of the other conditions, the drawing on the front page is provided as an illustrious measure as have been all of the architectural exhibits they have shown to the neighborhood meetings and to the Planning Commission. In terms of what their commitment is to the architecture is they feel that they have made a certain level of commitment. They have agreed to absolute maximum building height of 35'; the location as shown on the application plan both in terms of building orientation, which they have shifted in response to neighborhood concerns to orient the buildings short wise and not long wise adjacent to the adjoining neighborhood. Also, included are the orientation with the parking below, relegating the parking, moving the entrance road to the northern boundary and to the middle of the property and in terms of their proffer for the Earthcraft Certification process they are committed to taking part in seeking certification so that it will be a sustainable design. They are not allowing any vinyl materials on the siding. Short of providing documentation in terms of what the actual exterior fa9ade will look like or what the materials itself will or the colors, they feel that they have given them a pretty good sense of the form, massing of buildings and how they will be viewed from the neighbors. At this point in the process with costs being what they are and it is so critical to bring an affordable project forward they are just not at a point where they are able to have the drawings in place to commit to any other level of detail beyond that. . Staff described the terrace wall issue very well. They would be happy to include the note on the plan as requested by staff with the understanding that they will need a little bit of flexibility of where they are defining the limits of disturbance and expanded on the critical slopes impact area. The concern about the retaining wall height is a sound one. They understand it, but it is a trade off and they are happy to take direction on that issue. In terms of the greenway easement possibly being on the adjoining Stonewater property they are happy with that and will accommodate the path on the Treedale property. They are committed to doing that. They worked with the Stonewater property owners to allow for the shared path and vehicular access to provide ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 6 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN . . . access to the shared BMP facilitator. Within that they are fine with accommodating that statement. . They are happy to work with the statement regarding working on modifications with the County Attorney. Within the blasting proffer their intent there was hearing from the neighbors and their concern in the neighborhood meetings and the last Planning Commission work session. Their intent there is to promise the neighbors that the same procedure and processes that were in place for the construction of the Charlottesville Catholic School just to the north on Rio Road would be put in place for the construction of Treesdale. With that they feel that this is a better design and project from last time. They appreciate staffs help and the Commission's direction. It is very important to AHIP the process for the tax credit application. The application deadlines are shortly after the first of the year. The zoning needs to be in place for AHIP to have any opportunity to compete. The tax credits are an integral piece of the economics to enable AHIP to deliver the 90 affordable housing units proposed in the project. From their standpoint, they have worked with the neighbors and staff on a challenging site in order to bring a better plan to provide a badly needed 90 affordable housing units within the community. Ms. Joseph invited public comment. Jeanette McCarthy, a County resident, said that she was here on behalf of IMPACT. They are an organization of 27 diverse religious organizations in Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Their mission is to create a greater degree of justice for local residents. One of the key focuses of IMPACT is affordable housing. They are most interested in creating more housing opportunities for families earning under $20,000 a year or 30 percent AMI. There are about 6,000 families in the Planning District that fall into this income category. There are valuable service workers, including teacher aids, house keepers for service workers, cashiers and landscapers. For this population there is a deficit of almost 4,000 units of affordable housing. The Treesdale project will help the community deal with this critical need. The housing crisis has had an especially bad effect on school children. The Albemarle County Schools shared these statistics with us. In 2003/2004 there were 84 homeless children. The next years there were 215. In 2005/2006 there were 284. In 2006/2007 there were 320 homeless children. As a retired teacher she finds these statistics appalling. They can't expect children to perform well in school when their lives are so insecure. Often people are concerned that affordable housing reduces property values. However, a study by the Center of Community Change showed that this does not happen. Also studies reviewed that the lack of affordable housing has a negative affect on employers, seniors, poor people, entry level service workers and public sector profeSSionals such as teachers, firefighters and policemen. A shortage of affordable housing also has a negative effect on broader quality of life issues such as economic development of the region, traffic congestion, commute time and air quality. In short, housing issues affects us all. We as a community need more affordable housing. IMPACT fully supports the Treesdale project. Leon Blumrich said that he lived on the corner of Penn Park Lane and was an orchid grower. He was concerned about the traffic. One of the Commissioners said that this was a rural road and that these big boxes do not fit in this setting. VDOT indicated that it was a rural road. This really affects the aesthetic values. He was the one who brought up blasting because of his well and his business, which it could greatly affect as well as the plaster in the homes. He did not feel that these large apartment complexes right on the road are fitting for their particular road. Mary Dickens, of 605 East Rio Road right across from the Treesdale project, spoke in opposition to the rezoning request. They need a report on the drilling that was done on this site for rock in the area of these buildings with the underground parking. The drilling of rock has been completed since the last meeting with the Commission on August 28, 2007. She asked if they could provide them with a report on this drilling at this time because they need answers to that. This project is incompatible with their area of East Rio Road, which is zoned R-4 and should not be changed to PRD zoning. Traffic congestion is overwhelming and causes delays for police, firemen and other services due to their overcrowded roadway with bumper to bumper traffic on this narrow 2-lane curvy road with no shoulders. They cannot get a ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 7 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN traffic count later than 2005, which VDOT's count was 26,000 cars daily. Now the pick up in traffic would exceed more than 28,000 daily. There are 3 schools within a fourth of a mile of this project that are private schools. The students need their own transportation to and from school as the students are too young to drive creating extra traffic twice daily. She asked that the rezoning request be denied. She asked how much more traffic can Rio Road endure. Brent O'Mandy, member of IMPACT and County resident, spoke in favor of the project. He had some previous experience that has shown him the critical need of affordable housing. For 30 years he was superintendent of schools and 27 of those was in an adjoining county. They had people there that moved back and forth from Albemarle County as they tried to find affordable housing. This created a great problem for the children and their achievement. Last year he worked on a study regarding the need for affordable housing. He thinks that it has been well documented. He asked that the rezoning request be granted. Jen Cunningham, an abutting property owner on Town Lane, said she had no problem with affordable housing. She questioned the diagram that showed the parking lot behind the third building. She asked if that was a change from the last meeting. She asked if there are sidewalks proposed coming in and out of Rio Road. It would be helpful to have sidewalks along Rio Road. Manna Greta, Resident in the City, said that he had been dealing with AHIP for a long time. He bought his house from AHIP. He did on a rent to own housing. At present he was a behavior specialist with Region Ten Community Services Board. He worked with a lot of refuge families and underprivileged low income families. The Parks Edge project on Whitewood has been very helpful for the community especially people that they have been able to bring down from mental health and all of those things have been given places there. They have gotten a lot of grants to provide affordable housing at that location. They need more affordable housing in this area to accommodate these needs. The Treesdale project is a much needed project. Lisa Hoy, at 1075 Town Lane, said that she lived right in front of the storm water management facility. She did not oppose affordable housing. But, she would have to sell her house if this project were developed as is. She did not think that they were clear on the stormwater management. That was a big issue at the last meeting. She saw a lot of things in this project that have changed. She did not think that they could say at this meeting that it was a go deal. There are still a lot of concerns such as crime and traffic. It is a great thing, but not behind her house. It would be a good project in another location. There are too many unanswered questions. Dan McCrellos, resident of Townwood Lane, said that this project would be a detriment to the surrounding community. It is out of character with the neighborhood. He asked if Meadowcreek Parkway is not completed on time what would happen next. The traffic on Rio Road was already at the limits that the road could sustain. There is no bus access, which would be needed for an affordable housing project. The homeowners in the surrounding neighborhood would be greatly impacted. Therefore, he asked that the project be carefully considered with these concerns in mind. He asked if it was not an affordable housing project would the project be approved. Robert Daniels spoke in opposition to the request due to the negative impacts the project would create. Whitewood Village was developed by the same developer for 96 units. The impact of that project is very great. He asked that the rezoning not be approved particular due to the tax impacts on the schools and roads. They are looking at the clear cutting of many trees on the site. The plans are not complete. He was concerned about no recreation being provided for the children and the high retaining walls. Also, he was concerned with the potential erosion problems created on his property. There being no further public comment, Ms. Joseph closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Commission. Mr. Craddock asked Mr. Barbour to comment on the blasting regulations of Fire & Rescue. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 8 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN . . . James Barbour, of the Albemarle County Fire Marshall's Office, explained the blasting permit requirements. Anyone who is going to blast in Albemarle County has to go through certain steps. There are 3 layers of regulation that company or person would be held to. They start at the federal level with. the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire Arms. The next level is at the state level with the State Fire Marshall's Office. Lastly, they are regulated by Albemarle County and through the Fire Marshall's Office. When a person applies for a blasting permit there is a process that they go through whereby they show their blasting plan, proof of insurance and that they have contacted residents within 300 or 500 feet. There is an entire chapter in the Statewide Fire Prevention Code and there are other restrictions on top of that to which they are held when someone wants to blast in a built up area. The concern is for occupied dwellings, occupied buildings and existing roads and utilities. There are precautions that are in the State Code and the National Standards that they inspect and look for when someone wants to blast. Mr. Cannon asked whether in his view those procedures are adequate to ensure that any blasting done on this site would not threaten the wells or structures of houses adjacent to the site. Mr. Barbour said that there is not a 100 percent guaranteed. But, there are things that are done. If someone is going to blast within 300'of an occupied dwelling you would be required to use a sizema graph. That will measure the ground vibration and the air disturbance. Most blasting companies will do a pre-blast survey. They will contact the residents and go in and inspect for damage before any blasting occurs. Then they will do an assessment afterwards. If they have a blast that goes out side of the range of what is acceptable in the blasting standard, then there is a potential that damage could occur. The likelihood of that is very little with today's technology and the blasting standards that folks are held to today. Mr. Cannon asked if he had a percentage or range that he could on that. Mr. Barbour replied that he had been in the Fire Marshall's office for ten years and they have investigated complaints and have had 5 that have resulted in damage in those ten years. They have had hundreds of cases. Mr. Craddock asked if he had an estimate of how many blasting days for a project like this. Mr. Barbour replied that he did not. It was going to depend on the type of rock that is there and what they are able to do. Typically the blasting permits that they issue last for a 30 day period. Only on the largest jobs, like Hollymead Town Center, etc. do they have to apply for an additional permit. Most of the jobs can be done within 30 days. Mr. Craddock noted that the extensiveness of blasting on this site is unknown at this point until they get their drilling reports and etc. back along those lines. Maybe the architects know more about that. Ms. Joseph asked what happens if something happens to the integrity of the well or to someone's foundation. Mr. Barbour replied that the blaster is responsible for any damage that he causes whether it is accidental or through negligence. That is why they are required to have proof of insurance. They are responsible for making that right. Mr. Zobrist asked if there was a bonding requirement or if it was just proof of insurance. Mr. Barbour replied that they do not have to post a bond, but just have to show proof of insurance. Mr. Zobrist suggested that blasters in the County put up bonds instead of having insurance. Ms. Echols pointed out that there were 2 other staff members in the audience to answer questions. Ms. Joseph asked Ron White to come forward and answer questions. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 9 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN Ms. Joseph said that she was surprised to see this go to 100 percent affordable housing. She asked if he had any comments on that. Ron White, Director of Housing, said that whether it was all proffered for affordable or under a 15 percent proffer the reality is that if it is a tax credit project 100 percent will be affordable. In discussions with the applicant about the idea of doing 100 percent because if they don't develop the project or get the tax credit it puts a burden on the next owner. In last work session there was some discussion that they might see a subsequent owner come back and want to rezone it for a less intensive use. The Neighborhood Model is clearly mixing and dispersing housing. They have to agree with that. In order to do a project and utilize tax credits to keep the rents down unfortunately the way the tax credit program is set up 100 percent of the units would have to be affordable. Ms. Joseph invited Glenn Brooks to come forward and address the Commission's questions. Ms. Joseph said that they heard a concern from a citizen about where the stormwater is. There were concerns expressed that there were erosion problems going on back there. She asked for an update on that and how this might affect their property. Mr. Brooks replied that this stormwater proposal came on the adjacent development plan before staff saw it on this one. As far as the erosion and impacts on this property he did not think that any of that has really change. They have moved their concept over a little bit to accommodate the neighboring development. Ms. Joseph asked if it was not alleviating any of the problems. Mr. Brooks said that he did not have that much detail and could not tell the. Ms. Joseph asked if he had reviewed if they did some terracing how far it would go into the wooded area. Mr. Brooks replied that it would pretty far. They asked them to move their disturbance line back from the original submittal because they knew they could not build that wall without some disturbance adjacent to it. He suggested that it would be at a 30' minimum and then terrace it. But, a bigger concern with these highly development sites that are bounded by retaining walls is that they really cannot protect them with erosion control measures during construction. They are using all of the available area and end up encroaching on the neighbors. That is the most difficult part. They have this difficulty that they are trying to preserve trees directly adjacent to the construction, which is very problematic. Action on ZMA-2004-00022. Treesdale: Motion: Mr. Edgerton moved, Mr. Cannon seconded, for approval of ZMA-2004-00022, Treesdale Park, with the condition that the items outlined by staff will be addressed before the Board of Supervisors meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 3:2. (Mr. Craddock and Mr. Zobrist voted nay.) (Mr. Strucko and Mr. Morris were absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2007-00022, Treesdale, will go before the Board of Supervisors with the following recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended approval with the condition that the following items be addressed before the Board's public hearing: 1. Provision of extra landscaping at the property lines and along Rio Road. 2. Provision of terraced walls where high retaining walls are currently shown on the application plan. Since areas of critical slope will be disturbed, trees should be replanted in this area. 3. Provision of enhanced erosion and sediment control measures. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 10 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN I . . . . - 4. Provision that, if parking waivers are provided, the parking lots shown near the adjoining property can be eliminated or adjusted along with adjustment of proposed grading shown on the application plan. 5. The preliminary site plan should be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to approval. 6. Removal of the proffer for blasting. The Planning Commission also said that architectural commitments are not necessary and that a critical slopes waiver was not granted with the recommendation for approval. At the time that the preliminary site plan is provided to the Commission, they can act on the critical slopes waiver. (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Recording Secretary) ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 13, 2007 11 DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES FOR ZMA-2004-00022 TREESDALE & SP-07-21 BETH GOLDSTEIN . . . r COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 November 26, 2007 Beth Goldstein 6482 Dick Woods Rd Charlottesville V A 22903 RE: SP2007-00021 Beth Goldstein (Yoga Meditation Studio) Tax Map 71, Parcel 21 Dear Ms. Goldstein: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on November 13,2007, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: Action on Special Use Permit: 1) The school use shall be limited to a school of VOir a and meditation instruction. and the location and scale of improvements for that use shall be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan titled "Ms. Beth GoldsteinNoga-Meditation Studio," prepared by Studio Elle, LLC, dated 8-2-07, and revised 10/3/07, provided that: a) Staff approval of a revised landscape plan shall be required. Plantings for screening of the parking lot, to consist ofa naturalistic pattern of multi-species trees and shrubs, as listed in the brochure titled "Native Plants for Conservation, Restoration, and Landscaping: Piedmont Plateau," published by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, are to extend along the northwest edge of the parking area from the property line to the existing framed shed shown on the conceptual plan. These plantings to be arranged in a density that would mitigate views of the parking area, with a spacing allowing the natural formlhabit of the plant material to be recognized. 2) Maximum attendance on any day shall be 18 students. C 3) Classes shall take nlace on no more than 4 davs ner week. 4) No outdoor amplified sound systems shall be operated for the school use. 5) Classes shall take place on no more than 20 days .per calendar month. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 8 a.m and no later than 8 p.m. 6) The use shall not commence and the zoning clearance for the use shall not be issued until: a) The Virginia Department of Transportation approves the sight-distance easements and the construction of the entrance improvements b) The Virginia Department of Health approves well and septic systems COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ST AFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: Staff: Scott Clark SP 2007-00021 Beth Goldstein SDP 2007-00095 Beth Goldstein Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: November 13, 2007 December 12, 2007 Owner/s: Beth Goldstein Applicant: Beth Goldstein Acreage: 2.0 acres Special Use Permit: 10.2.2.5, Private Schools TMP: Tax Map 71 Parcel 21 Existing Zoning and By-right use: Rural Location: 6482 Dick Woods Road (Route 637), Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; approximately one-half mile west of the residential density (0.5 unit/acre) intersection with Burch's Creek Road (Route 689). Magisterial District: White Hall Conditions or Proffers: Yes RA Rural Areas Requested # of Dwelling Units: nla Proposal: Private school for yoga instruction with Comprehensive Plan Designation: classes up to 20 days per month, up to 20 students Rural Areas per class. Character of Property: The property is a small Use of Surrounding Properties: Agriculture and residential parcel with a house and accessory low-density residential buildings. Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. No new structures or public facilities 1. The use would require the creation of a would be required for the use. parking area. However, the impacts of the 2. The scale of the use would be limited to new parking would be mitigated by the the capacity of the existing building and recommended condition regarding septic system. landscaping. The parking area would be surfaced with gravel, in keeping with the gravel roads in the area. 2. Trees on adjacent properties would be need to be cleared to provide sight-distance easements recommended by VDOT to make the entrance safe. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval ofSP 2007-00021 (with conditions) and SDP 2007- 00095 (with conditions). . Petition: PROPOSED: Private school for yoga instruction with classes up to 20 days per month, up to 20 students per class. ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) SECTION: 10.2.2.5, Private Schools COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (.5 unit/ acre) ENTRANCE CORR1DOR: No LOCATION: 6482 Dick Woods Road (Route 637), approximately one-half mile west of the intersection with Burch's Creek Road (Route 689). TAX MAPIPARCEL: Tax Map 71 Parcel 21 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall Character of the Area: The surroundings consist of open and wooded rural land. Uses in the area include agriculture, forestry, and low-density residential uses. Specifics of the Proposal: The applicant is proposing to operate a yoga school and meditation center in an existing converted barn on the property. Classes would occur up to 20 days per month, and the applicant has requested to have up to 20 students each day. A new gravel parking area would provide parking for up to 10 vehicles. (See Attachments C and D for the proposed conceptual plan.) . Plannine: and Zonine: Historv: The applicant began the use without the necessary special use permit, and thus was in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. This application is intended to rectify the violation. In October, 2007, the County approved a request for an accessory tourist lodging on the site. This approval would allow lodging in one bedroom of the dwelling on the parcel. Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan: The Rural Areas chapter of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on the protection of rural communities, resources, and land uses. This proposal does not directly support those aspects of the Rural Areas. However, the County has approved special use permits for private schools in several cases, ranging from part-time programs to full-time church or private schools, including residential programs. This proposed use would be smaller in scale and would require fewer improvements than many of those approved facilities. The Comprehensive Plan recommends that "alternative" land uses be available to provide landowners with alternatives to residential development. Since this use would be on a 2-acre parcel on which no further development is possible, there is no opportunity for conservation to balance the impacts of the proposed use. However, the impacts of the proposal can be assessed in terms of the standards recommended by the Comprehensive Plan for "alternative" uses: . · Reversible (so that the land can easily return to farming, forestry, conservation, or other preferred rural uses): This use would require no new buildings, and would have a gravel parking area that could be easily removed. · Scaled and sited to cause minimal impacts on their rural surroundings: The use would require clearing of trees on adjoining properties to secure the 280-foot sight lines recommended by the Virginia Department of Transportation. This would require clearing of trees in the sight line, SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 2 which would impact the rural character of the surroundings. However, the owners of those properties have agreed to grant the easements. . Minimal in their public health and environmental impacts: The Virginia Department of Health has stated that the septic system on the site is sufficient for the proposed use, if attendance is limited to 18 persons. . Viable with no increase in public infrastructure or services, either at time of approval or later: No public infrastructure is necessitated by this use. Additional needs for public services are not anticipated . To minimize the impacts of these uses, the County could avoid requiring parking lot paving, curb and gutter, commercial entrances, and other site improvement features more typically found in the Development Areas: The use would require a new entrance, but no paving would be required. STAFF COMMENT: Soecial Use Permit Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 31.2.4.1: Special Use Permits providedfor in this ordinance may be issued upon afinding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, The primary impacts on adjacent properties from this use would be from traffic, noise, and the visual impacts of the use. The Virginia Department of Transportation has approved the proposed traffic-safety measures (see "public health, safety, and general welfare" below.) Staffhas recommended conditions requiring limited hours of operation and a prohibition of outdoor amplified sound to address noise concerns. A condition requiring buffering of the parking area with native plant species in a naturalistic pattern would address visual impacts without creating the appearance typical of a commercial use in the Development Areas. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and Limits on the scale of the use and the character and design of the improvements are intended to protect the rural character of the surrounding area. that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Section 18, Chapter 10 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the purpose of Rural Areas zoning: "This district (hereafter referred to as RA) is hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment of the zoning map for the following purposes: (Amended 11-8-89) -Preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities; -Water supply protection; -Limited service delivery to the rural areas; and -Conservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources. (Amended 11-8-89) " This use does not directly support these purposes, but does not require new public facilities or additional public services. with uses permitted by right in the district, The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The uses permitted by right under RA Zoning directly support agriculture, forestry, and the conservation of rural land. Part of the County's vision for the RA districts includes the support of agricultural and forestal communities through community meeting places, at rural SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 3 . scales, that provide the opportunity to take part in community life. The proposed use is comparable to or smaller than other private schools approved in the Rural Areas, and provides an educational service at a relatively small scale. The limited scale and hours of operation of the use are intended to limit impacts on by-right uses. with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, There are no additional regulations in section 5.0 for this use. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has stated that the proposed 24-foot entrance is acceptable for this use and location. In order to provide sufficient sight distance from this entrance, VDOT will need sight-distance easements (to the west on Tax Map 71 Parcel 21B, and to the east on Tax Map 71 Parcel 29D). This will require removal of trees in the sight lines from the entrance, which will extend 280 feet in each direction. The owners of these parcels have stated that they will grant those easements (see Attachment E) The Virginia Department of Health has stated that the existing septic system for the converted barn is sufficient for up to 18 people per day. Therefore staff has included a recommended condition of approval below that would limit attendance to 18, rather than 20 as proposed by the applicant. . Staff has received 19 letters from citizens regarding this proposal, all of which are in support of the school use on this site (see Attachment F). Site Plan Waiver In conjunction with the Special Permit request, the applicant has also submitted an application for site plan waiver approval. These requests are reviewed in accord with Chapter 18, Section 32.2.2 of the County Code which states: "32.2.2 Theforegoing notwithstanding, after notice in accordance with Section 32.4.2.5, the commission may waive the drawing of a site plan in particular case upon a finding that the requirement of such plan would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; provided that no such waiver shall be made until the commission has considered the recommendation of the agent. The agent may recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of such waiver. In the case of conditional approval, the agent in his recommendation shall state the relationship of the recommended condition to the provisions of this section. No condition shall be imposed which could not be imposed through the application of the regulations of Section 32.0. " The site review committee has reviewed this request and is able to support the waiver with the conditions listed below. The conceptual plan provided for the special use permit request is generally sufficient for the scale of site improvements needed for this use. . Section 32.7.9.7 and 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance would require screening of the parking area with a double-staggered row of evergreen trees or shrubs. However, the section states that "alternate methods of vegetative screening may be approved by the agent." It is staffs opinion that a more natural pattern of landscaping would be more appropriate in this rural setting. Therefore, in accordance with Section 32.7.9.3 Variation, Waiver, the Zoning Administrator has found that the alternative landscaping (as required in recommended condition l(a)) would forward the purposes of the chapter and otherwise serve the public interest. A recommended condition of approval is included below that would require staff approval of a revised plan showing this landscaping (condition 1 (a)). SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 4 SUMMARY: Staffhas identified the following factors favorable to these applications: 1. No new structures or public facilities would be required for the use. 2. The scale of the use would be limited to the capacity of the existing building and septic system. Staff has identified the following factors unfavorable to these applications: 1. The use would require the creation of a parking area. However, the impacts of the new parking would be mitigated by the recommended condition regarding landscaping. The parking area would be surfaced with gravel, in keeping with the gravel roads in the area. 2. Trees on adjacent properties would be need to be cleared to provide sight-distance easements recommended by VDOT to make the entrance safe. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP 2007-21 with the following conditions: 1) The school use and the location and scale of improvements for that use shall be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan titled "Ms. Beth GoldsteinNoga-Meditation Studio," prepared by Studio Elle, LLC, dated 8-2-07, and revised 10/3/07, provided that: a) Staff approval of a revised landscape plan shall be required. Plantings for screening of the parking lot, to consist of a naturalistic pattern of multi-species trees and shrubs, as listed in the brochure titled "Native Plants for Conservation, Restoration, and Landscaping: Piedmont Plateau," published by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, are to extend along the northwest edge of the parking area from the property line to the existing framed shed shown on the conceptual plan. These plantings to be arranged in a density that would mitigate views of the parking area, with a spacing allowing the natural form/habit of the plant material to be recognized. 2) Maximum attendance on any day shall be 18 students. 3) No outdoor amplified sound systems shall be operated for the school use. 4) Classes shall take place on no more than 20 days per calendar month. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 8 a.m and no later than 8 p.m. 5) The use shall not commence and the zoning clearance for the use shall not be issued until: a) The Virginia Department of Transportation approves the sight-distance easements and the construction of the entrance improvements b) The Virginia Department of Health approves well and septic systems c) Community Development staff approves a revised landscaping plan for SDP 2007-00095 that satisfies Condition lea). Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval ofSDP 2007-00095 with the following condition: 1) Staff approval of a revised plan showing a) Landscaping consistent with condition lea) ofSP 2007-00021 b) Parking stops as approved by the County Engineer ATTACHMENTS A. Location Map B. Detail Map C. Conceptual Plan (Sheet 1) D. Conceptual Plan (Sheet 2) E. Letters regarding sight-distance easements F. Letters from public SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 5 . . . Attachment A SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 6 Attachment B SP 2007-21 Goldstein, Beth o 72.21 ! _.J I ......, \ \ \ \ \ , \ \ I! 25 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ F~ 100 \ Parcel of Interest I I Streams .. Water Body Parcels 10' Contour ~ Roads Driveways Buildings 50 SP 2007-21, SDP 2007-95 Beth Goldstein PC 11-13-07 - BOS 12-12-07 7 u .j.J c Q) S ..c: u l\l .j.J .j.J ~ c>(~ C/>-, ~ i\: ~ \ \ \ lj.." l:}\. .5 \ \ J 'I '\ -() ~ ~ t ~ """ ~ \~ \ \ ~~\ SI.5 \ ~ ~~ ~~ ,~<q ~ -l "'" ~ .... ~ ~ .... ~ " f ~r i~ >1\" \ ~~ \ ~~~ , ~~~ ~" ~ I, I D \ ~~ >( ~,- ~ I \I \i~~ jL >1 1:' \ ~ G t,+d IT,lJ 2\ \ \: ,:' ,\ IL ~~~ ~~~ 0 ~);. [t, \ "l.!.-, m~ \ \~ '" h \ ~ ;; ~,~~ \ /' \'~ I~ \ ! 3~ + ~ \ \ Il:, \. I-.'Il\~!:! " '._ \/ \ , · ~ · , C> \\\~ "~q:'-~ "+\ \ II) \~\ + /, ,) \ ,<'" '0s:/) \ ' \\+.. :<' "'--',:~\ \ \. ~J ~ ~~~ '< .~~~~ ~l~~ .... --,,/~.-' / (' ~~ -.J~ !J ~ _ ~~(' ~~~ ,!!~ ~n~ ~ --.... ~ l, l)" f't- '" ---- '" '- '" ~'I"l (~ 11~' 010'01_<; kif ' " (\I III ~'--...: l ~ ~91a ~ ~ft J ~ ~ ~ \I) t- 1t! ~ D"1 II).-J ;j ~S}\T'( t (J l- ""1 , CI ~li ~ '<( -- ! j -~ -=r~ . b * i1 1 '~ JO,. ~ t-- ~ 'iJ 9 r I/) ~r ~ f-:. '--...... i../ .,+? 3 ,po I <'0 .~I S ~ ~ .~ .,>: .......... 'S: o~ C>~ '" III //;$ "- I / I ,:4 -;" ~ II) ~~ ~, ~. 'iI~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~t t! ) o Q ,. / ,~ " " "- \ \\ \ /... ,,--~ \ '\ "- '" \ ,?:b'ZIC M po ,so .s) fY " " ~ ~ ~ ~ Q -I-! ~ OJ S ..c: u co -I-! -I-! ~ ;:?,'r1 ._, 1 v 8 ._~ ~ , t~ ~ ~ o. f ,/ IJ\' ,~~.../ ~~ " ~ ~~ 'I:l~ '~~ /\., ~~ $\ '. '-, /' /-:- f '-- ,/ . Vi ( ~.. J~'/\"-' I '" ~\ .A-' I , \.;c~ .,<'. \; J., f ,'Y ;' \ 4'..,< '\ I' "'),. ,r ."Y-/, ", ~ '""r r, 7\~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ h '( ~~ ~~. ~~ ' l.i\~ ,/ ~-:)/ I I 1 I il:"' i ..; j; ')- ... '-1 ._/ .. (~ ('n ~ r-' olqn1-~ ~ , \ \ "'-. v \ / / ;\ \ ,"'\. / .I ,,__"?/:' '. '. ~ ..-,:.. /. . // /1\ \ \ \' //" '." / - _'.\ '1\ . \/// / _1.- .. >/.... //~ / '. / <:- ..', '; \ \ \ / / "-- / ...\- /1 ,J ///.1' :~ />:; \\ -- (" -::.-./ < .,.~; I\~ '\ // I .. \? \t ...'//" . ~ __ " . '.. . '. _ r /.' {., J<,"\ . .. ! \ , /.../ \ v- \ <.1\ . .\/ I '. . .~\ I~. ~/ ,'/ ..\--.1 /'/1' "(. -- ,. V .; / / \ '-", 1-( . \1' -<" / I \, , .. V- \ / /~ -1- ..' ; '~ f\ -#"l''-....-...: . .4~ , /~',. \ '~'iI~. I I. / II'/(n." . ' , '/ \, tftJ'. , A \ /, /.._ -7 1,..1".(1' ,',' '-- . \.;:. / - ,,--' /. ,^ v '1 !~. ',';<, 'x' ;(- --- / /.. ; (. J' /, '-I //::" I r' - ,< ~ ..\'\;~ ~ ~1\- ", ,( \" - \ \\\ '''\. ... \ '. / · '- ',{;r.,'\, -<, '''\'i//.-J ;<~'I\"; ll)/.. '\ ~\\v\ /..::;, -~ I ' , ,.." ~"! 4' ,',;', ". I \ ,r /, , ---,- , '; '''J/.,- ......! )~ ,> Yo '!." -\-~~'. --:f--' ":-'.- .---:.- _ _.. __--\-__. \ . '\...... ,'. . I >" " ~-:... i~\< ~ ...-- ",,/VI'7 .(..L.' ,...,. /c>"d ..L"::/"1 "'~A!7.L# Y . "-- - -. .. c7, 0/ ~ // /' . i \.......~--- ,- .. ':::::"/.,/y'H/?n" '-?o::Y .;r;:--<<-d?~ '?'~/-'t4-'0'/...(#"T;..t~ ;';;'0" /v .--:v.~M;;:'., "".L -:-&'~ ~ NC'LL~ c7.....<.,./.?~c;- .:(./. ~,! 3/ J.0;y I' ......y~"'..."... /1G':'....~~ <.~~~-v:-r~ .-;,.....,....4c-;:;:~y}?' ~/, ".':",......;.v'-', c; . ,'-.. Id I' j' / I !~ .. \ \ I., " .\ -,-.{ \ ,'. f.. ~~~ \ '\ II) iI.},:, ~. ~ ~ ~\\ " ,.I W' {~ ~ ~:.Il ~ ';is " i\J.). ~ \ '1" " . 'i .\\ . JI- '> ~ \ ("~ , :'> ~ "'" " ~ '\ ~ '. ~~ \' 'I-.. ~' ~ , .~~~ ~ \ ~t\~ ~\, 't \ \:; \ \ ;,;:" - \;<-- --;.- %", \,~ ""' "3.. -~ -- ~ .~ 1L \. 0 -:\\\~ \ ~ '., ,/ .'\\~~ \.- / .- )\ "'\. ~ ./ ' . !\I \~" ," \~\~ " .\ .-X \ . '\ ',,\ /' \ ' r'\ / '-\ ~ ' ,,:-:, ~\~ . \ \;:- ._~ \ /, / \. \ ".. '\ / ~ ~\\"\. \ , ~- '-'\~~ / ..;,. '>:"- \ \. / \~ \~~~~\c, / / -,s:-. ,~Y"", - \~ ''-:..\..... \, ~\~ "=:~ -~ ';;.. ~~ \. ~~' ~'O \ ~\ ;1 ~ . \ (0" \~ \~ ~ ',:'" ''- ,~ ~ .3 ~ "\ ~ .' '" ~" ~0~ I \ ""~ ~ ~ ~ (- \)\ . 6-.\. () ""- ~ '~. <'\\0 CJ ~ ~ <" '0 \ r ."', ~ ~: ". \. \\ \\ " \ \ .. ,~ ~..~:,~. ". .. '\"l;, . .....~r 0./',/ ,;) .-: ~-'.":.!.r:'-~ "1 "'" l) '<( L7'ifl! 2~ J \f\ If) I- iJz Ii' J 9 \~ -~ ~-- L ( - , ~'i. \ c- lY. o ~ 11.1 \-"',L C lL I t ;u'" (I \,1)" \1 ~'!J c r D' (\. m \ '\. '\ c :m Ul '0 (5 (9 ~ (j)..... COo LO' mN I ..- ...... 0"1 0...... "I(/) 0-0 ClCO (/). -..... ......0 "I I · ('t) ........... o I 0...... "I...... O-() C1)c.. ~ . . . Frank Quayle Roy Wheeler Realty 1100 Dryden Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 September 9, 2007 Scott Clark Albemarle County Zoning Dept./County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Clark, I support Beth Goldstein's application for special use as a private school at 6482 Dick Woods Rd. As one of her abutting neighbors, I agree to grant her a sight-distance easement. This will enable her to remove trees on my property necessary for the sight-distance from her driveway according to VDOT requirements. Sincerely, ~a~ Frank Quayle ~: . C-.A/I wl"l~ 7~~ :I/d~ r-- f S-/- ~-/t)cJ Attachment E Ie ~ Charles Yancy 6557 Dick Woods Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22903 September 9, 2007 Scott Clark Albemarle County Zoning Dept./County Office Building 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Clark, I support Beth Goldstein's application for special use as a private school at 6482 DickW>00ds Rd. As one of her abutting neighbors, I agree to grant her a sight-distance easement. This will enable her to remove trees on my property necessary for the sight-distance from her driveway according to VDOT requirements. 21Y' ChM~) Attachment E n . . . - .-.I Scott Clark, County Planner 401 McIntire Rd Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 Duane Zobrist, Planning Commissioner 3 Boar's Head Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 David Wyant, Supervisor P.O. Box 81 White Hall, V A 22987 RE: Beth Goldstein Special Use Permit 6482 Dick Woods Rd Charlottesville, VA 22903 September 11, 2007 Good Morning, I am writing to you in support of Beth Goldstein's application for a special use permit for her property at 6482 Dick Woods Rd. She has requested that the studio space be rezoned as a "private school". I understand that this will allow Beth to use the yoga bam/studio up to 8 days a month for classes or seminars and 1-2 yoga classes a week. I am in complete support of this rezoning matter. I believe that having the yoga barn space and yoga classes available in the Batesville community is a very positive addition to our rural community. Being able to access these services locally, with out adding to traffic and pollution by driving to Charlottesville, is another benefit. I believe that the road is more than adequate to accommodate any traffic changes and I know that there is plenty of space for parking. There is no negative impact to the rural nature of the neighborhood. I am a resident of Albemarle County in the Batesville community and I whole heartily support the approval of the special use permit to rezone the yoga studio as a private school. I request that each of you do what you can to aid the passage of this request. Thank you for your attention, 1915 Thunder Ridge Rd Afton, VA 22920 P.O. Box 147 Batesville, VA 22924 Attachment F ~ ''1 , l._ ---- August 20, 2007 Dear Scott, I am writing you on behalf of my friend and neighbor Beth Goldstein. She has applied for a special use permit to teach yoga in her barn. Beth could not be a kinder, nicer person, or a better neighbor, and letting her teach a little yoga in her barn could not be any more of a no-brainer. She had been teaching yoga in her barn for several years before the county shut her down at the request of one of our other neighbors (new money who moved down from No V a, built themselves a monstrosity of a house, and proceeded to act unfriendly in a mean spirited, bigoted type of way towards most everyone). Anyhow, small town politicking aside, there has never been any negative impact on our community from Beth's yoga barn. In fact, it's been a wonderful resource, and a positive influence. Driving into town, fighting for parking, burning all that gas, etc just to take a yoga class kind of defeats the purpose. It's much more suitable to continue having yoga classes in the quiet, tranquil setting out at Beth's. There's no noise impact on her neighbors, and there's no traffic or parking issues. Actually, as I understand it, the parking will be the big thing to discuss, assuming she gets the special use permit (and I sure hope she does). The current parking is fine as is; you're basically just parking in Beth's driveway whenever you attend a class, and there's rarely more than two or three cars' worth of people for any given class (the barn itself is quite a small space-it's really a converted equipment shed, not an enormous animal barn). I hate to think that Beth is going to have to pave over her garden to create an eyesore of a parking lot just to conform to regulations designed for the city and growth areas. If that's the way it has to be, at least let her have gravel instead of asphalt-she lives on a dirt road after all! Beth's yoga barn is a wonderful part of our close knit little community. Please approve her for whatever she's requesting, apply a healthy dose of creativity and flexibility in interpreting our laws, and keep the paving over of paradise to a minimum. There's enough of that going on around here already. Thank you for your consideration, and feel free to give me a holler if you'd like any more input or have any questions--either that or just stop by next time you're in the neighborhood. cKeon PO Box 111 6678 Plank Rd. Batesville, VA 22924 434-823-1413 Attachment F f.3 ~ . . . September 26, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 40 I McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4569 Re: Special Use Application for Beth Goldstein 6482 Dick Woods Road Charlottesville, Va. 22903 Dear Mr. Clark, I am writing to wholeheartedly support the special use application being pursued by Beth Goldstein in Batesville to enable her to offer yoga classes in our community. I have lived in Albemarle County for over 30 years and have lived in Batesville for the past 28 of them I have also been an Albemarle County employee with the Department of Social Services for the past 24 years, working in the stressful arena of Child Welfare. Having a yoga studio in my own community is of tremendous benefit to me personally, in terms of a healthy outlet, and is a welcomed and positive offering to many of us in this rural area of the County. I have heard nothing but ardent support for this endeavor by numerous friends and neighbors that reside in this community. I am asking for your support of this special use application as it moves forward to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and I thank you in advance for your attention and consideration. ~ Cheryl Lewis 2320 Stillhouse Creek Road Afton, Virginia 22920 Attachment F ) 4 ~ Pamela Grammer 6709 Dick Woods Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 shoshin@ntelos.net (540) 456-7042 Scott Clark County Planner 40 I McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 8/29/07 Dear Mr. Clark: I am writing concerning the special use permit for Beth Goldstein at 6482 Dick Woods Road which will come before the Planning Commission at the Sept 4th meeting. I strongly support and urge you to approve the special use or rezoning for this property as a "private school". My family and I live approximately 1/3 mile down the road from Beth Goldstein. We drive by her house and property at least 6 times a day, usually more! In the last 3 ~ years (the time we have lived on Dick Woods) we have never had any problem with traffic, parking, congestion or visibility passing her house. We have never had to maneuver to get around parked cars...cars have always been parked well off the road with no disturbance to the traffic on the road. Beth Goldstein is a very friendly and considerate neighbor. She works constantly to improve her property with beautiful landscaping and l11aintenance on her house and outbuildings. She walks or rides her bike almost everyday through the neighborhood, stopping to chat with neighbors whenever she sees t\tem.. She cares about the neighborhood and the people that live there. To us she is an ideal neighbor. Activities at Beth's yoga studio are always very quiet.. ..no noise at all We feel the yoga studio is a completely positive asset in our neighborhood with no negative impact whatsoever. I say "asset" because many people in our neighborhood would be thrilled with the opportunity for yoga so close to home. Thank you for considering this special use permit. I fully support the rezoning of this property. ~u~~ Cc: Duane Zobrist, Planning Commissioner Attachment F l.~ . . . .----. ---- Julie Trump 6588 Plank Road Batesville, VA 22924 434-823-5300 August 30, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 40 1 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 RE: Special Use Application for Beth Goldstein. 6482 Dick Woods Road. Batesville Dear Mr. Clark: I am a Batesville resident who at one time enjoyed and benefited from taking yoga classes at The Barn in Batesville, lovingly cared for by Beth Goldstein. As much as I would like to go into a rant over the puny-mindedness of the mean-spirited person who has now deprived a great chunk of the Batesville community use of The Barn... I just want to say that I observed NO negative impact on the road, Dick Woods, the neighborhood, or the community as a result of The Barn's presence. Far from it. The people who attend functions at The Barn are only there to appreciate the beauty of the place. We are loving, wonderful people who care about the earth and our fellow-human beings. I wholeheartedly support the use of The Barn as a yoga studio, etc. It is one of the things that makes Batesville such a special place to live (with the exception of whomever Gladys Kravitz person sought to unfairly deny us all the peaceful community spirit that in-dwells at The Barn. Understanding that the law is the law, we were not hurting anyone by doing yoga.) I ask you to approve the special use or rezoning for this project that Beth enthusiastically and compliantly seeks to undertake. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. I trust the well-being of the Batesville community will be served by The Planning Commission's and The Board of Supervisor's positive decision in this matter. S!J:1cerely, .r-- ~: Irvr Cc: Duane Zobrist, Planning Commissioner Attachment F 1& ----- James M. McKiinley-Oakes 709 Park Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 977-4703 August 28,2007 Scott Clark County Planner 401 Mcintire Rd Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 Dear ML Clark: I am now a residernt of Charlottesville. Before moving into the citYJ I owned propert in Albemarlse County for thirty years. I would like to address the special use permit requested by Beth Goldstein of 6482 Dick Woods Rd. Ms Goldstein is creating a lovely place for residents of Albemarlew county to renew their bodies, minds, and spirits. I strongly support her application because it benefits the community. And there is no downside. The small number of cars and people involved will have no negative consequences on the roads, traffic, or her neighbors. Ms. Goldstein deserves our wholehearted thanks for the contribution she is making to the quality of life in her neighborhood and county. Sincerely, ()~ jt,c;L$1-~?" Attachment F 1'1 ~ ~ . Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Rd Charlottesville, VA 229024569 Dear Mr. Clark: 700 Harris Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 978-2195 August 25,2007 Beth Goldstein as requested a special use permit for her property at 6482 Dick Woods Rd. I have had the pleasure of visiting Beth's property. I would love to be able to attend yoga classes there for my health. . I believe that Beth's use of the property as she plans will be a great benefit to us all. Thank you for considering my support for Beth's request. . /1inqreJ~ J'd.ney, L.C.S.W. Attachment F I '? Page 1 of 1 Scott Clark From: Emily McKeon [emily@knitdenise.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 04,200711 :51 AM To: Scott Clark Subject: Yoga Barn support Dear Mr. Clark, I am writing to encourage you to issue a special use permit for the Barn/yoga studio at 6482 Dick Woods Road, owned by Beth Goldstein. As a member of the Batesville community for twenty years, I can say without reservation that Beth and her studio has been nothing but an asset to this area. I have never been to a yoga class there where parking was an issue -- there are rarely more than a handful of extra cars in the driveway, and everyone who parks there is very conscious of staying off the road and driving courteously. I drive and walk on this road often, and have never seen anything disruptive about what Beth or others are doing with the space. Her beautiful home and gardens are kept immaculately groomed and offer a gracious look at what this area used to be. The yoga studio/Barn is neatly tucked behind the house and slightly down the hill, and is also a very attractive building, so offers nothing unsightly to the eye. As a small business owner myself, I feel that the Batesville area and other small communities like it should be encouraged to create spaces such as Beth's barn where local people can come together and learn, and a (meager, in her case) living can be made in a low-impact way. Beth's barn has brought many of us in this community closer together and helped us stay fit and flexible without having to drive twenty miles to Charlottesville on a weekday evening. I can see no way in which this space is a detractor to the community, so I ask you to please rezone Beth's studio as a "private school." Thank you for all that you do. Sincerely, Emily McKeon PO Box 111 Batesville, VA 22924 info@knitdenise.com http://www.knitdenise.com 888-831-8042 Denise Interchangeable Knitting Needles 1618 Miller School Rd. Charlottesville, V A 22903 Attachment F I {, Page 1 of 1 . Scott Clark . . From: Miriam Rushfinn [mrushfinn@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 03,20077:17 PM To: Scott Clark Subject: In support of Beth Goldstein special use permit To Scott Clark, I am writing to support Beth Goldstein's (6482 Dick Woods Rd, 22903) special use permit for her building to be rezoned as "private school" . I absolutely support her efforts and use as a yoga studio. It's great to have this environmentally friendly resource near me in Southern Albemarle. It's a creative use of the property and a wonderful asset to our rural community. There are no negative impacts. Thank you for your consideration and support of this change. Sincerely, Miriam Rushfinn Miriam Rushfinn 4306 Burton Road North Garden, VA 22959 Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. Attachment F 2-D August 23, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 RE: Beth Goldstein Application for Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Clark, I am writing to express my support for the special use permit submitted by Beth Goldstein of 6482 Dick Woods Road, Charlottesville, V A 22903. As a county resident who lives close to Dick Woods Road, I whole heartedly support the permit allowing the Barn to be used as a yoga studio . and private school. The classes that are being offered are important to our community as they provide a place to come together to learn and grow. These classes are small and the impact of cars on the road and people in the area will be minimal while the neighborhood will be enhanced. I hope this letter will help the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission approve the rezoning for this studio and that you will continue to support, thought this action, a better community for Albemarle County residents. Sincerely, -ri~ jennifer bauerle 1194 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attachment Fz.., . Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Dear Mr. Clark, . I am writing as a 30.+ year resident of Albemarle County in support of the parking lot project for the yoga barn and studio in Batesville. As a resident of Batesville I can attest to the fact that the yoga barn is a great asset to our community allowing us to take yoga without having to travel into Charlottesville. In the time of high gas prices and environmental concerns, I hope you will consider the needs of the resident of Batesville. There will be virtually no negative impact on the road, the neighborhood or the community from cars or people attending classes. The planning commission and the aoard of Supervisors approve the "special use or rezoning of this project. I urge you to do the same. Sincerely, 1~ Margaret Haupt 7181 Batesville Road . Afton, Virginia 22920 540 456 6596 Attachment F ZZ- ~ Kathleen R. Garcia 7087 Dick Woods Road Afton, Vrrginia 22920 August 8, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Clark: As a resident of my current community for over 13 years, I am writing to support the special use of Beth Goldstein's property as a private school. Being a school teacher, I greatly value the opportunity that Beth's studio offers for yoga lessons and stress reducing classes. There simply is no other place like it in the county. This property, located at 6487 Dick Woods Road, Charlottesville, has been restored in a way to preserve its historic flavor and now beautifies the area. Before Beth purchased the property, it was going through various stages oftransfonnation and she greatly improved the property. We now have a place to attend classes with a view of one of Albemarle County's best vista. How nice to be able to do something like this without driving 20 miles into Charlottesville and using gas while polluting the air! I frequently drive by this property on my way into Crozet or Charlottesville. There has never been interference from cars or people attending classes due to parking or traffic in and out of the building. Sincerely, . \.,... ^ ~LxtJcr' ~ Kathleen Garcia Attachment Fz..-; . . . . ---------------. August 16, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 40 I McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Applicant: Beth Goldstein 6482 Dick Woods Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. Clark: I'm writing in support of the Yoga Studio operated by Beth Goldstein. This is a positive addition to our rural community. There had been no negative impact on the road or neighborhood when I have attended sessions at the school. Parking was off the road, and traffic was not an issue. It is my request that the planning commission and Board of Supervisors approve the special use/rezoning for this studio. Thank you. Sincerely.,'" .... i/ ~'\___________ /'/ /1/ /') 1\,1 -/....;,<.,:" .\...... ...// _/-f-;1,d...-r~ /' h..'::--..'....,.../ /:f ~~~/Ct./ ",....,','.....,. .>- I L/v ~ - ~.~ - ~-~ /vV"P&/ ~ /" Charlene Swartley" ...___.".,.,"." /:--- Attachment F ;:<-1 ~ 1001 Locust Ave. Charlottesville, VA 22901 August 1, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22903 '"' ~l'/~. rJ' "J.-.- \y~ Y (VkY; v0~ I understand that Beth Goldstein has applied for a special-use permit to rezone her residence as a "private school." .As one who has taken yoga classes in that facility, I strongly urge you to support this request. The yoga classes are a real boon to the community, and there is no effect on the road or the neighborhood from this use. Dear Mr. Clark: Sincerely, !!k~~~L Marga.vviiller ~ !/J /f . f' 1.. L _ - ( / ~/L.S. -::d.c--CdJ..~/vJ i-ULOA] LJ Ok ~LI 1/ ,. Attachment F z.S ~ . . . Aug. 6, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 40 I McIntire Rd Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 Dear Mr. Clark; I am writing to support Beth Goldstein in her efforts to rezone her property at 6482 Dick Woods Rd Charlottesville, VA 22903. Our property, 6557 Dick Woods Rd connects to Ms. Goldstein's and has had no negative impact from the activities at the Barn. We have not been affected by traffic or visitors to her residence. We totally support her and approve of her having the Barn StudiolY oga on her property. Ms. Goldstein is a wonderful neighbor who has always been considerate of those residing on Dick Woods Road. Ms. Goldstein has worked extremely hard to provide both a visual and aesthetic property which one can enjoy as you bike, hike, horseback or drive by. Her property setting is ultimately perfect for yoga and it adds a positive benefit to our neighborhood. Please approve her applications. Sincerely, ~..J~~Jl' . (Jt deL- ---111..- v.::2 - _&Mrs_chQE.Yancer Attachment F 2-1;. .-"':'l"'J'~ ---- Scott Clark County Planner 401 Mcintire Rd. Charlottesville, VA. 22902-4569 08.03.07 Applicant for special use application: Beth Goldstein 6482 Dick Woods Road Charlottesville, VA. 222903 Dear Sir: The mentioned above applicant has petitioned for a special use pemlit for a building to be re-zoned for a "private school." I see no potentially negative impact this situation would cause in this neighborhood or community. Parking and traffic would not be high volume on this road. The attendees would comply with any parking designated areas. This rural area would not be impacted in any form, ecologically or monetarily. I would support this project and feel it would be a positive addition for our community. I recommend the planning commission and the Board of Supervisors to approve this special use or rezoning for this project/studio. Thank you for listening. Debra Caffrey 821 Jefferson Drive Palmyra, VA. 22963 IIII!CEIVED AUG 06 2007 C(] UNITY DEVELOPMENT Attachment F Z1 ~ ".".,,,,. .'......,. ~.'.~ . July 26, 2007 Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4569 Dear Mr. Clark, I am writing in the support of my friend and neighbor Beth Goldstein whom runs a yoga/exercise and event barn in our neighborhood. I am a yoga enthusiast and a busy mother with a full-time job that enjoys the convenience and professionalism of Beth' s barn for practicing yoga. This barn/studio has been an incredible find for me and the neighbors that participate and would be a great loss to this rural community whom would have to drive to Charlottesville or Waynesboro adding more traffic to the roads and exhaust fumes in our atmosphere. . I have never found that her classes cause undue burden on our road or excessive commotion in our neighborhood. It would be very much appreciated if you could please grant her the special use permit and the zoning necessary to continue her endeavor in this area. Sincerely, /1/7~cPf tkA Marie A. coct:ll ~ 6715 Dick Woods Road Charlottsville, VA 22903 540-456-7006 . Attachment F 1.-":> ~ .---=' Scott Clark Albemarle County Planner 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, V A 22902-4569 September 27, 2007 Dear Mr. Clark, I am writing in support ofthe Special Use application for Beth Goldstein, 6582 Dick Woods Road, Charlottesville, V A 22903. I am a native of the Charlottesville / Albemarle Area and have spent many years enjoying our beautiful area. Having Beth Goldstein provide the Barn/yoga studio for innovative and community building health classes is a huge resource for our area, adding depth and dimension to the cultural diversity and expression that the City/County is proud of. The beautiful rural setting sets it apart as a true blessing of our community. I have lived in the Free Union and Western Albemarle area for over 18 years, and while I personally feel very protective of the rural aspects and undeveloped space and beauty of Albemarle County, I also truly believe there is NO negative impact on the road or Dick Woods community from Barn/yoga studio participation. The traffic is so slow and sporadic that I believe it to have much less impact than having 1 single family home added to the neighborhood. Persons driving to a yoga class or Barn activity are not the ones speeding down the road kicking up dust and endangering runners, other cars, and wildlife, but instead are the ones operating in the world with respect and reverence for all, peacefully making their way to a healthful gathering of community. Considering the aggressive and monetary world we live in, we have a NEED for this Barn/studio to help bring balance into our lives and community. Having this studio is a Right Thing, and approving the application for special use is the Right Thing. I ask that the Albemarle County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors APPROVE the "Special Use or Rezonip.g" for this application. I will be extremely disappointed and discouraged if Ms. Goldstein's classes are not allowed to reconvene by our County Government. Thank you for your attention to this request, Sincerely, ~ Maggie MacInnis 8 Winchat Lane Palmyra, V A 22963 Attachment F 2Li . Scott Clark County Planner 401 McIntire Rd Charlottesville, VA September 27,2007 Dear Mr. Clark; I am writing in regards to a matter that will be presented on Oct. 2 for a special use permit. The applicant is Beth Goldstein at 6482 Dick Woods Rd. My family is a long-time resident of Dick Woods Rd and we vehemently support the approval of Ms. Goldstein's application. . As a rural resident of Albemarle County, we treasure the right to use our property to support our families. Ms. Goldstein is a responsible and conscientious neighbor. Ms. Goldstein's property is used in a quiet and reasonable way that is safe and unobtrusive to the neighborhood. Services are made available to rural residents that would otherwise have to drive for many miles. As a neighbor, I highly value not only the services provided but the protection of her rights as a property owner. I strongly encourage you to approve Ms. Goldstein's application. Thank you for your consideration to this important matter. Sincerely; Alice Scruby 8153 Dick Wood Rd 540-456-8107 . Attachment F '1,C ~ .5 4 '5.l1 ; ~1.:: . ~ I 4}: 4 i.d.~ ... ~= . !..; . '" ~:;i "i ':' ;j J f i i 1 I ! j j . 1 ~ . J~'.J~J <Ij.,./ yk"".( ) ~ o o I I'- o o N E s..... CO LL ..c 0) -- (l.) <(~ ::E CO NO Q. ns 1: s: o .- ....., ns u o -J C) c -- L- eo (]) I \f- a (]) en a c.. L- ::J C1. -+-' U -- 5.... - -+-' 0) <9 -~ 0 U o::o-+-,co _ c.. c.. E 0) :J en 0-0-0(0 -:: ~ c -0 en ..:::::::: co 5.... 0) -0 en 0) t;o~E co 0 C E ..c :J 0 ~oC>() ..0 c,+- co..c=O 0) 0> 0) -+-' C -CD ~ 0) oz-oJQ ~o(j)Q) 5....-+-,05.... _~co o co :J -+-':;:;O)CT -+-'c"'Cen en -- 0)0)>0 :J-ooo CT - Ci5 5.... co (],)O)c..~ 0::0::.9~ . l..)l',p ~\l~ ~~"..;,\ 'i'!-"" - - \..... ... - -=- ~-=- -- _J " "'*:: =:~ ~~" ~ ill o 0' ~. c ns - f1. ~ u o - I:a ~: ;;; ~ '"' ~ ~ ~ ~ -~___t -- --/.,: j = - - .. 'IS Jt , ~,j . ".~ - ,ul i!. .. l.d.~ .. <i::: "~ ~-1 .....~.j) ]':';:5) ! i wi:; i I J ~ ", Ii 1 ~ : j;j:.J": J <ltb#- rtJ~t.Y,"(;; en en E (]) Q) ::J U en C en 0- OC) C C -- 0-0 -- C en co en~ -- en E~ EO o L.. o (]) C).!: c~ -- 0 C-o C C ~ co (L Q.) "C .~ Q.) - c: ...... CJ) ~ .- CJ) :.c t "C ~ ~ ...... Q.) Q.) t. E c.. ~ Q.) ~Q.) c- o U c..Q.)~ e c.. 0 o:t: en \f- ~oco ...... c: ~ c..~ ::J o.~ C)c..c CJ) E "C , , c: Q.) Q.) . ~ -0 E ~.~ u:i:~ ~ E "'C _"C ~ R.> -..c~ :!:: 0 c: c.. ~ \oJ c: .~.- 0 CJ) 5 ~ Q) e 0.. ::J -g en Qj Q) :> ~ ..c c.. Q.) Q.) Q.) E > ~ ::>"'C +-' c..o ::O.c Q) Q) :g ..c......co -g g> ~.9 CO +-' ::0 0 CO ...... ~ ..Q..c CJ) E.8 e '0 Q.) CJ) Q.) co......:!:: S -:= c.. Q.) ..c Q.)...... ~ 0 c: 'I- -- C) "C 0 ~ CO Q.) C:::J co Q.)E c: 0 ...... .- ::J ~ . == c- 'I- CJ) Q.) - . - () "C U Q) ::J CO::o .E Q) "E Q) Q) ~"'C ..o.c CO +-' rJ 0 .c Q) () co co = "C c: Q.) 3:...... c: . -...... \f- CO ~ Q.) ............ CJ) :c 0 OI S E c: () () ...... ..-...: c: 'I- """"'-- co Q.) Q.) c: ...J c: Q.) t"'I"l: """"'""' ~ ~ Q.) c.. Q.) 0 \U CO \f- ~ ~ E c: ~ . - C) \f-......; c.. 0 0 0 o CO .!a 19 0 U '>- C U U E - >.C ~ Q.) 0 0 0 0 . 0 CJ) co 0 Q.) ().o ~ ~. _ ...... ...... tt:: () ...... CJ) ~ co \oJ J CJ) co ~ 0 o..I - c...5 .S: -g -g en C.D 0.. 0.. Q) ~ Q) Q) E e Q) Q) >. 0:: .s K ~.~ ~ ~ i= a.. z Z..o <( . . . . . . . . c o -- I · CO -c c CD E E o u CD 0::: ..c 0) s..... :t: ..c 0) ~", ~ 3= ........ ..c "'0 0 \.&.I = "'0 .8 ~ 0)> CO = 0) 2 o (j) ~ .- .- ~ ..c c () c"'O 0) a3 0........ 0) . ~ () 0 C () ~........ 0) 0) ~ '" .,^ rn ~ . "'0 C rn..c..c \.&.I \V v, 0) "?"-.: rn..c ........ :::J c .> I'- (j) C \oJ ........ 0) 0 (j).- 0)0 rn .c ~ 3=~~::: . (j) ~ s..... 0 3= 0 C 0).- \V ~ rn ", "'0 N C N O).S; Ci3..c () C\oJ'~ C 0) EO)> = rn '+- 1"':- 0 s..... s..... .- ..c .- 0 rn ... ~ .- E........ 3= "'0 s..... ,^ s..... ~ (j) 0 0 "'0 C a. ~ 0) E\V .- 0........ C C 0) 19"?"-.: O)..c = () ~c 0 t: \oJ ~ E s..... O):t: rn~ 0) 2 ~ 0 O)~ C s..... C () rn~ :::J 0) s..... () C 0 C:::J ~ "'0 ~ o .- a. 0) .- cot rn C (j) (j) "'00 3= 0.- 0........ 0) 0) (j) :t: 0) ", ~ ~ a. (j) E.~ 0) E C ~ \.&.I () a. s..... rn ~ C . rn .E 0 c E ..cO) "'O..c . .~, rn (j) ~ s..... E 0 0 "E ~ ~ (j) "'0 :.c 19 0) 0) ~ () C \V 0 ~ ~ L- (j) ~ o..c () 0) 0 \oJ \.&.I r- \.&.I 0........ rn s..... ~ o ON 0) C '- ~ "'0 "'0 rn ........ ........ ~ (j) "'0 -""'..c 0) rn ~ ~ (j) () "'0 "'0 M . - 0) rn "'0 c..c.-=: C == 0) 0) s..... ~ > "'0 3= Co.- s..... 0 a. ........:: 0) s..... > 0 0) 0 C (5 0).- a. E ~..c "'0 C -;;; .~ CD ffi C ~.~ rn ",........ E 0) 0 s..... ~ ", - (j) E (j) . \.&.I C ", --'----'" ", \.&.I a.. "?"-.: ._ C ........ \.&.I +:i........ \.&.I rn \oJ ........ rn () .- C ~ 0) ..c 0) E..c 0 rn .() 0) E 0) '0........ ........ ..c0)..c t: 0:: .(j) ,^ - 0 ..c E s..... 0) (j) "?"-.: . - _,^ m a. :::J a. a. "'0 ........ cEO o.~ ..c a. C (j) 0."'0 E C (j) rn..c O)..c E rn 0 0 ", 0) rn - ........ E ........ ........- \.&.I 0 E rn-J..c C 0) ~ C 0) C () <Ii c" (j) ........ .3= 0 ~=g ~ ~.O)s..... E o.co C 0"'00 == s....."' 0 == "'0 (j) ~ REO.- ~ 0) 0) & 0) a. &~ -0- 0) (j) s..... ~ CO (j) (j) C rn > "'0 rn 0 0)........ s..... 0) 0) E 6 ~.c 0) s..... 0) (j) rn ~ ..c s..... s..... ,^ s..... C 0) 3= rn 0) "'0 .- co t (j) 0 m"'O rn ..c 0 0 ..c 0 ~ g ........ :::J:c~ 0)"'0- ~..c CD ~ () s............. C/) u.......... .c s..... rn a.. . . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Board of Supervisors Claudette Grant, Senior Planner c.P December 6, 2007 ZMA 2007-004 Oakleigh Farm Attached to this memo are revised, signed proffers and revisions for the code of development. This information was received on Wednesday, December 5, 2007, two days after the Monday December 3, 2007 deadline per the Board policy. This new information has not been reviewed by staff. It is provided as information to the Board. If you have any questions, please call me at 296-5832, ext. 3250 or email me at cgrant@albemarle.org . CC: Oakleigh Albemarle LLC 690 Berkmar Cir Charlottesville, VA 22901 File , , PROFFER STATEMENT Date: December 5, 2007 ZMA#: 2007-00004 Oakleigh Farm Tax Map and Parcel Number: Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A 8.822 acres to be rezoned from R6 Residential to Neighborhood Model District (NMD) in accord with the General Development Plan entitled "Rezoning Request for Oakleigh Farm," prepared by Terra Concepts, PC, revised through November 16, 2007 (the "General Development Plan") Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, is the fee simple owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 45, Parcel26A (the "Property") which is the subject of the zoning map amendment application #ZMA 2007-00004 known as "Oakleigh Farm." The Applicant for Oakleigh Farm is also Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC. The Oakleigh Farm community is herein referred to as the "Project." Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, Owner hereby voluntary proffers the conditions listed in this Proffer Statement, which shall be applied to the Property if the rezoning is approved by Albemarle County. These conditions are proffered as part of the rezoning and it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. Affordable Housine:. A. 15% Affordable Requirement. The Owner shall provide a mixture of affordable housing units and cash in lieu of affordable housing units equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project (the "15% Affordable Requirement"). The affordable housing mixture shall be comprised as follows: (i). The Owner shall provide affordable housing dwelling units equal to at least seven and one-half percent (7.5%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form offor-sale or for-lease affordable dwelling units as described in this paragraph 1 (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of one or more of the following unit types: single-family attached housing (townhouses or duplexes), condominiums or single family detached units. The Owner or its successor in interest reserves the right to provide the Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or any combination. (ii) In lieu of each additional affordable dwelling unit that would otherwise be required to meet the remainder of the 15% Affordable Requirement for affordable housing within the Project after the Owner has provided the Affordable Dwelling Units referenced in Paragraph I(A)(i), the Owner shall make a cash contribution to Albemarle County for the affordable housing program in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) for each such unit (the "Affordable Housing Cash Proffer") as described herein. For example, if the total number of residential dwelling units within the Project is one hundred nine (109), 16 Affordable Units would be required to meet the 15% requirement. The Owner shall provide eight (8) Affordable Dwelling Units to satisfy the 7.5% requirement of paragraph lA(i), and One Hundred Fifty-Two Thousand, Eight Hundred Dollars ($152,800.00) ($19,100 x 8) to satisfy the requirements of paragraph lA(ii). Any unit for which the Affordable Housing Cash Proffer is contributed as provided herein shall count as an Affordable Dwelling Unit for purposes of this Paragraph 1, but as a market rate unit for purposes of Paragraph 2. (iii). If the 15% Affordable Requirement has not already been satisfied as determined by the County pursuant to these proffers prior to the issuance of the building permits for each of buildings C, D, and H shown on the General Development Plan, the Owner shall either demonstrate to the County's satisfaction that at least 15% of the residential dwelling units in such building will be Affordable Dwelling Units, or the Owner shall pay the Affordable Housing Cash Proffer to the County in lieu of each Affordable Dwelling Unit that would otherwise be required to be paid to achieve the 15% Affordable Requirement for the building being permitted. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the Owner may "carry-over" or "bank" credits for affordable units in the event previously built buildings within the Project provided more than 15% Affordable Units, or in the event the Owner has paid the Affordable Housing Cash Proffer for an equivalent number of units ("Affordable Credits"). Any such additional Affordable Credits shall be allocated toward the fifteen percent (15%) minimum for the buildings that remain to be constructed of buildings C, D and H as shown on the General Development Plan. B. For-Sale Mfordable Units. The for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units shall be affordable. to households with incomes up to eighty percent (80%) of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that the housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes, and homeowner's insurance (pIT!) do not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income, provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such affordable units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400) or sixty-five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a "silent" second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein. All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any "silent" second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing. For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. C. For-Lease Affordable Dwelling Units. (i) The initial net rent for each for-lease Affordable Unit shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office. In 2 ~ each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes ofthis proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-lease Mfordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph 1 C shall apply for a period often (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-lease Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defmed by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). (ii). Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for- lease Affordable Dwelling Units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this Paragraph l(C). In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-lease Affordable Dwelling Unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term, shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this Paragraph l(C). Prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-lease Affordable Dwelling Unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this Paragraph l(C)(ii) have been satisfied. (iii). Reporting Rental Rates. During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent Affordable Unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. D. Notification Period: County Cash Option. (i). Notification Period. All purchasers of the Affordable Dwelling Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The then-current owner/builder shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Unites). The ninety (90) day period shall commence upon written notice from the then-current owner/builder that the Unites) is within one hundred twenty (120) days of completion and, that on or before the end of such one hundred twenty (120) day period shall be ready for occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser who executes a contract of purchase during this ninety (90) day period, the then-current owner/builder shall have the right to sell or lease the Unites) without any restriction on sales or lease price or income of the purchaser(s), provided, however, that any Unites) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. The requirements of this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each of the Affordable Dwelling Units that are purchased. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for the Affordable Units. 3 (ii). County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the Property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then- current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each affordable unites), then the then-current ownerlbuilder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then-current ownerlbuilder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Unites) will be available for sale. E. Inspections. The County shall have the right, upon reasonable notice and subject to all applicable privacy laws, to periodically inspect the records of the Owner or any successors in interest for the purposes of assuring compliance with this Paragraph 1. 2. Cash for Capital Improvements Proe:ram. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contributions shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e., schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contribution shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit in the following amounts: (i) Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. (ii). Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each single family attached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. (iii). Zero Dollars ($0.00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit. 3. Annual Adiustment of Cash Proffers. Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (alk/a Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year. For 4 I ' " each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 4. Tree Preservation. The Owner has submitted as part of the Code of Development for Oakleigh Farm a tree protection plan (the "Tree Plan") for thirty-nine (39) trees within the Project, as shown on the Tree Plan, which specifies tree protection methods and procedures, including fertilizing, tree protection fencing and mulching which shall be complied with during and after development of the Project. Prior to the [mal site plan approval, the Owner shall submit a bond or other form of surety in the total amount of Twenty-Nine Thousand Dollars ($29,000). The bond or surety shall be submitted to guaranty the replacement of those trees which are numbered 1, lA, 2, 3,4, 4A, 5, 6, 7, 8,9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 19,20,21,22,24,25, 27A, 30,31,32,35,38, 38A, and 44D on the Tree Plan (the "Bonded Trees") in the event that any of the Bonded Trees die within a period offive (5) years after issuance of the last Certificate of Occupancy within the Project. The bond or other surety shall be in a form acceptable to the County Engineer and the County Attorney. 5. Pedestrian Easement. The Homeowners' Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Project shall contain a provision which grants, or directs the Homeowners' Association to grant, a pedestrian easement over all sidewalks within the Project. Such easement shall be subject to review and approval by the County and shall be granted and recorded in the Circuit Court Clerk's Office within six (6) months after County approval of the first site plan or subdivision plat within the Project. WITNESS the following duly authorized signatures: Owner: OAKLEIGH ALBEMARLE, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company By: (~- ~ w~~ , \J7) . I Printed Name: C; eor2bFE" Title: ""/tfJ~-AZ:J 1 479905v8 5 - , .. rPlYti!utJrp1#' {l/llc/6)4&on, c~reat deal of effort has been invested in developing a framework within which a diverse, high-quality, mixed-use community can evolve on this unique site. The Nuttycombe family owned the property for many years until 2002. Up until that time the farmland surrounding the subject property was referred to as Oakleigh. The knoll that is located to the rear of the property appears to have been the homestead of Oakleigh Farm. A complex of residential structures, sheds, and bams speaks to what once was a center of thriving and diverse farming activity. Although the original main farmhouse was removed by a prior owner, numerous mature oak trees, some as old as 150 years, remain on the property and provide the setting for a small park area. The property is surrounded by a variety of residential, retail and office uses and is thus an infill property. Several development proposals have been brought forth for consideration, but all have failed for one reason or another. One obvious deficiency of each of those prior proposals was the failure to incorporate the mature trees into the project. Oakleigh Farm recognizes the presence of these large specimen trees as a resource that adds significant value, both financially and aesthetically to the project. Oakleigh Farm presents an opportunity to introduce high-quality architecture into a natural setting which creates a sense of history and longevity, where vegetation is a dominant feature and contributes significantly to defining the space. The challenge was to develop a financially-viable plan for development of the property that preserved many of the site's trees. The new neighborhood would include a series of businesses adjacent to Rio Road and a special enclave of homes surrounding a mature wooded common to enhance the sense of place naturally created by the trees. Oakleigh Farm will be a high-quality, mixed-use community that incorporates unique natural features into the General Development Plan. The convenient location, diversity of uses and housing types, quality of design, and philosophy of preservation will make for a desirable community. Ii ([)okleffll, ~m 2 ~mpe1Y {jjjJ;"e~JCOlf/lld mnd C(f;Xidi/J~ ?B04lditwJl6 aginally established in 1897, Oakleigh Farm was built and managed by Mr. William Nuttycombe. The farm remained in his family unti12002. At one time Oakleigh encompassed many acres in this area. Over the years parcels have been conveyed off from the original landholding. Today, what remains of Oakleigh is 8.822 acres surrounding the original homestead, on the south side of West Rio Road. Woodburn Road intersects West Rio Road directly across the street from Oakleigh. The Oakleigh property is identified as Tax Map Parcel 45-26A (547 Rio Road), and is currently zoned R-6. The existing homestead occupied a prominent knoll within this precinct and the remnants of Oakleigh that are the subject of this rezoning represent the high ground of the surrounding area. The land slopes away from its center in all directions. From the high point the land falls 10' to the east, 15' to the south, 20' to the west, and as much as 40' north toward Rio Road. The property provides wonderful views in many directions from the knoll. Adjacent to Rio Road the property is open pasture that has been used for grazing horses. It extends away from Rio Road roughly 350' and the average slopes in this area range between 6% and 9%. The pasture also has a slight slope from west to east, consistent with the grades along Rio Road itself. The rear of the property appears flatter with a slight rise in the center. The remains of long-abandoned structures dot this area, and what was once a farm complex accented by young trees is now a heavily tree- canopied setting overseen by majestic oaks. Several clusters of formal boxwood plantings, as well as volunteer shrub masses exist, but by and large the property is open and very park-like. The Oakleigh property is surrounded by existing development. To the north, across Rio Road, are single-family homes that front on Woodburn Road and a mixed-use enclave of buildings. To the east and west are commercial enterprises. Berkmar Crossing is a small commercial village of multi-story buildings with a contemporary feel which extends over to Berkmar Drive; and the Garden Spot, is a long-established landscape center lying just to the west. Heritage Hall nursing home and Berkeley subdivision share common boundary lines with the Oakleigh property to the west and south. Water, sewer, and other necessary utilities exist either on-site or adjacent to the property. No wetlands, floodplain, rock outcrops, or critical slopes exist on site. ~ Oakk{?1f :%Pm 5 , ~ ~/jUli/l~ ?fJ~iteda (!/Iul iilt://Ild 62t;e ~ Comprehensive Plan designation for the property is Urban Density Residential (6.01 to 34 DUlAC). While some commercial activity makes sense along Rio Road in the gap between Berkmar Crossing and The Garden Spot, such uses would be inappropriate in the treed section of the property. Not only is this area surrounded by residential uses, but the substantial grading that would be associated with an aggressive use of the property would surely compromise most, if not all, of the mature trees. For that reason, we have chosen a mixed-use development and have incorporated residential uses that will be compatible within this treed area and have located the commercial elements of the project along Rio Road. The commercial venue will have a limited depth and will be tied directly to Berkmar Crossing. The buildings will be designed to take advantage of the terrain and limit, as much as possible, the need for retaining walls. Housing can be introduced into the commercial buildings as another means of transitioning from what has been predominantly a "single-use" building program on adjacent sites to an integrated, mixed-use community that is envisioned by the Neighborhood Model District. Additionally, siting buildings along the perimeter of the property, and orienting them inward toward a central park will facilitate the preservation of many of the existing trees. Because the preservation of existing trees is such an important planning criterion for this property the Owner has engaged a professional arborist to consult in the design of the community. The arborist has studied the property and the existing trees and has been able to identify and classify the trees with regards to their general health. He has also provided the Owner with suggestions on how to improve upon the layout of the project with respect to preserving the trees. Ii {()a;[./eljlb :%Jtm 8 ~: ~ ; z ~ * i i DO I: i I i , ,. " ~~!Z~ ~~~~ I-!Zc.. :I:~O x~,...J ~ ~ ~ Q ~ .S '5 o OJ 'i' Z~:9 '" 0 "'- > .. '" '" ~ .. 'c .~ "'." P..~ :g ~ ~~ >-~ Q. 8 ~ OJ e.o ..!!! ..: i : Ii " ,/ . {------~--~---- ~.i't!~ !~!!~ "- .,p~.....' ,..,'.' (! V:,--- I, I' I' " II Ii IL__- r'-- u ~.-ri:~f;'I:; ~;l " ...:: ",'i,! .!i!~i ?" ~.,i II' : . !!l !ii'~__~: \. ',; ,- -. 'f;--'c=~~,=cctf.l U ~,V-c~-;'~-4~! il: <1.., ' : '~.; . to, /<""1 "--1 ~o \ ..,;'::::::::.:..::.::==-:.'m;.:::::::...:...._....:::-.:-p-. . ~ Q,~,: 10 "".. I....... r _...~...........-......._....._....... I ii! 0 ~~~ I I--(~I ~!1 \ "a' r;\ ~ l \ ~ "2, L:J' :~' I' n, \ ..> ' 1,"1:, " .#: ,J IL.. I'L."" ./ I . ~~, <. l" -Aio.tt;;'-- '\ '\ t<Jf> II! ,'. 'I'. " '. '. : r- . ///-' \\ i:- Ii ~ ,_J.- -- -.-.-1' '/l '1.. . , ,';/ \ , .~ J'" . ' . L /f: ' ! \ Y. '".;/ >),. r \. [' ~l;l<l; i \ \\ ;.~, " '.) / ,:--~-.rq~- ~~ t ,\~.:~~~ l~ '" ',", "- " Ii'., . EJ !1. '. \''--<'~ :- .. . I h i:' \. " 'iID, . \- \. \. !. ~ :c " !.. ; ~ , ',\ \ ~. : ,~~ Il '\ \. \ I' '. I "II ~,; ... I \ ~\ i: . \ ,I :' '. \ \' ['~: 1 'Ii ) \\ "- I - O' __no J -..-..t'- / '-.. ~..:.-.._.._..-.J:i~::=-..-" ~~ g- .j i I i I' .! / " .~ MI. .-;:'.'" ,~'" j ~ r , e. Arborist shall conduct regular Integrated Plant Management (IPM) visits during the growing season for a period of 5 years, starting upon the issuance of the last Certificate of Occupancy within the project to inspect for insect, disease, nutrient or environmental problems. ~ @!)e6e}(IJalio/j/. !J.)J;2n/J'ff cgo/l6/;}(rtelio//7. All tree work will be done according to American National Standards ANSI A300 (tree care operations) and ANSI Z133.1 (safety requirements). SITE PREPARATION 1. An arborist shall approve the location, method and timing of all work to be completed within the proximity of trees to be preserved. 2. Trees to be saved shall be identified, marked and compared against a site plan and inventory by the Arborist. 3. Before demolition of existing structures, access routes for equipment shall be determined and by the Arborist tree protection fencing installed by the Contractor at the limits of all construction access. 4. Demolition of buildings within the root zone of trees to be saved shall be planned in order to minimize the impact of equipment on roots. Arborist shall instruct contractor how to minimize impacts. 5. Areas shall be defined for: construction traffic, material storage, parking and washout by the Arborist in consultation with the Engineer. TREE PRESERVATION AREAS 1. Tree preservation areas should be approved in advance by the Arborist. All deviations from those plans, or encroachments on designated preservation areas should be approved by the Arborist. Fines may be established by the Owner on the Contractor(s). 2. Tree protection fencing shall be placed by the Contractor before the start of construction. No construction related operations shall occur within the preservation area without approval from the Arborist. This includes; parking, traffic, material storage, topsoil storage or cleaning equipment or tools. All Contractors shall be made aware of the preservation areas and the consequences of damaging trees due to negligence or disregarding posted preservation limits. !l (Q{I,fle~h. :!!;:;;;nn/ 43 . . . y COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 November 8, 2007 Terra Concepts c/o Steve Edwards 224 Court Square Charlottesville, V A 22902 RE: ZMA2007-00004 Oakleigh Farm (Sign # 62) Tax Map 45, Parcel26A Dear Mr. Edwards: On October 30,2007, the Albemarle County Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend denial by a vote of 7 :0, of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. This recommendation of denial was based on the following staff recommendations: 1. Impacts on public facilities are not appropriately offset through proffers meeting the County's cash proffer policy or the provision of public improvements. 2. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall had not been provided 3. The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on December 12,2007. It is the Board of Supervisor's preference that a public hearing not be advertised until all ofthe final materials for a zoning application have been received by the County and are available for public review. Therefore any new or additional information regarding your application, including final proffers if applicable, must be submitted to our office at least twenty-three (23) days prior to your scheduled hearing date, which is November 19,2007. Please review the attached proffer policy established by the Board of Supervisors on December 7,2005. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. oette Grant Planner Planning Division cc: Oakleigh Albemarle LLC 690 Berkmar Circle Charlottesville Va 22901 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2007 - 004 Oakleigh Farm AGENDA DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSAUREQUEST: Request to rezone 8.82 acres from R-6, residential to Neighborhood Model District, in order to provide 109 dwelling units and up to 28,800 square feet of commercial space. ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACTfS): Cilimberg, Echols, Grant ATTACHMENTS: YES LEGAL REVIEW: NO OWNER/APPLICANT PURCHASER: Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC/with Terra Concepts, P.C. c/o Steve Edwards as the contact. BACKGROUND: On October 30,2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Oakleigh Farm rezoning request. Staff and the Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request by a vote of 7:0 for the following reasons (See Attachment I): . 1. Impacts on public facilities that would result from this proposal are not adequately addressed through the provision of the standard cash proffer or otherwise through cash, land or in-kind improvements. 2. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall have not been provided. 3. The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project. Other outstandina issues: 1. Timing of payment for affordable units. 2. Provision of an easement to the adjoining property. 3. Correct wording problems in the proffers. 4. Correct the Code of Development as requested by staff. 5. Impacts on public facilities; and 6. ARB comments need to be addressed. DISCUSSION: On November 16, 2007, the applicant submitted new proffers, code of development and application plan in an attempt to address outstanding issues noted by staff and the Planning Commission. Staff reviewed this submittal and provided comments on the proffers to the applicant on November 30, 2007. However, staff cannot verify the status of the outstanding issues, as signed proffers were not submitted on December 3 in accord with the Board's policy. As of staff's comments to the applicant on November 30, 2007, the status of the outstanding issues was as follows: 1. Timing of payment for affordable units. The applicant has responded with revised proffers that provide affordable housing dwelling units equal to at least seven and one-half percent (7.5%) of the total residential dwelling units within the project. In order to reach the 15% affordable requirement, the other 7.5% would be paid in a cash contribution equivalent to ($19,100) for each unit. This proffer language is confusing. More specifically, timing of payment for affordable units is inconsistent. Timing of payment to the County is described in one section of the proffer as prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the unit (s). There are other sections of this proffer that should describe timing of payment that do not. Provision of an easement to the adjoining property. . 2. 1 . . 3. The applicant has submitted a copy of a proposed agreement between Oakleigh and Berkmar Crossing regarding easements for access, landscaping and grading/construction. Staff does not have an executed agreement yet, but understands the applicant is working on this. Make the proffers and Code of Development consistent with regards to limitations on the amount of retail square footage that would be available in the development (14,400 square feet) The applicant no longer has language in the proffers that relate to limitation of the retail square footage on the site; however, page 26 of the Code of Development describes a non-residential gross square-footage (gsf) range of 7,200 - 28,800 with a note that explains the non-residential gsf of no more than 14,400 gsf can be used for retail uses. This issue is addressed. Correct wording problems in the proffers. As previously mentioned in item 1 above, the proffers are still in need of language/technical resolution. Correcting the Code of Development as requested by staff. Some minor technical revisions still need to be completed to the Code of Development. Impacts on public facilities that would result from this proposal are not adequately addressed through the provision of the standard cash proffer. The applicant has provided proffer 2: Cash for Capital Improvements Program, which describes the owner contributing cash to the County in the amount of $17,500 for each single family detached dwelling unit and $11,900 for each single family attached dwelling unit constructed within the property that is not an affordable dwelling unit. The applicant is also providing condominiums which would be considered apartment units. Apartment units cash proffers are not provided. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall had not been provided. The applicant agreed to try to make contact with Heritage Hall representatives in Roanoke. Staff has not received any new information regarding this issue. The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project. As previously stated in this Executive Summary, the applicant has agreed to provide 7.5% affordable units on site. In order to meet the 15% affordable housing requirement, the applicant has also agreed to provide cash in lieu of for 7.5% of the affordable units. The Director of Housing finds this acceptable; however, the Planning Commission requested the affordable units be physically provided within the project. ARB comments need to be addressed. The applicant has made revisions to the tree preservation proffer that address staff concerns; however, for clarification purposes staff makes the following request: The revised proffer extends the bonding period to 5 years and starts the bonding period upon issuance of the first residential building permit. The applicant has explained that this represents the point at which the vast majority of the site work will be completed. Because site work can continue beyond this time, and because building construction can also impact trees to remain, this starting point seems too early. The trees would be best protected by a bonding period that starts with the issuance of the last Certificate of Occupancy. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. In addition, page 43 of the Code of Development (top of page, letter "e") indicates that the "Arborist shall conduct regular Integrated Plant Management (IPM) visits during the growing season for 3 to 5 years to inspect for insect, disease, nutrient or environmental problems." The arborist's time period should correspond to the bonding period, so that a professional arborist monitors the trees in question throughout the period of potential impact. Staff has approved a parking modification request for this project. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request. While the applicant has attempted to address the outstanding issues noted by staff and the Planning Commission and staff reviewed the applicant's new submittal and provided comments, the applicant failed to submit signed proffers in accord with Board policy on December 3,2007. Therefore, staff recommends the Board defer action on this rezoning. Furthermore, as the Commission has not had the opportunity to review the information submitted after its action, staff cannot verify that the reasons for the Commission's recommendation have been fully addressed without this application being referred back to the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: ettachment I: Planning Commission Action Memo, dated October 30,2007 ttachment II: Code of Development, dated November 16, 2007 and Application Plan, dated April 30, 2007, revised November 16, 2007 Attachment III: Proffers, dated November 16, 2007 2 . . . LOCATION: Tax Map 56, Parcels 97A, 97A1, and 97 (only a .833 acre southwest portion of the property as shown on the General Development Plan) along Radford Lane near its intersection with Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt. 250 W) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall (Rebecca Ragsdale) Ms. Long, representative for the applicant Weatherhill Development, said that staff summed up all of the issues very well. It was essentially a technical amendment to the proffers to provide additional flexibility for the affordable housing to be for rent units in addition to for sale units and also to expand the types of units that could be provided as affordable units. Ms. Joseph asked that they expand the affordable housing proffer so that it includes the option to offer cash in the event that the County prefers cash to a housing unit at the time of site plan approval because a potential buyer has not been found. Ms. Long replied in the affirmative. Action on ZMA-2007-00014: Motion: Mr. Strucko moved, Mr. Morris seconded, for approval of ZMA-2007-00014, Liberty Hall Amendment, as amended, to include the additional proffer language offered by Ms. Long. The motion passed by a vote of 7:0. Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2007-00014, Liberty Hall Amendment will go before the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for approval on December 12, 2007. ZMA-2007-00004 Oaklei~h Farm (Si~n # 62) PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.82 acres from R-6 zoning district which allows residential uses and 6 units/acre to NMD - Neighborhood Model zoning district which allows residential mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses and 3 - 34 units/acre. Proposed number of units is 109 for a density of 12.3 units/acre. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential - residential 6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses. Neighborhood 1 ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: 547 Rio Road West (Route 631) directly across the street from Woodburn Road (Route 659) TAX. MAP/PARCEL: TM: 45/P: 26A MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio (Claudette Grant) Motion: Mr. Craddock moved, Mr. Zobrist seconded, for denial of ZMA-2007-00004, Oakleigh Farm, as recommended by staff for the reasons stated in the staff report as unfavorable conditions. Discussion: Staff noted to the Commission that the applicant had agreed to address the following items that had been identified in the staff report: 1. 2. 3. Timing of payment for affordable units. Provision of an easement to the adjoining property. Making the proffers and Code of Development consistent with regards to limitations on the amount of retail square footage that would be available in the development (14,400 square feet) Correcting wording problems in the proffers. Correcting the Code of Development as requested by staff. 4. 5. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 30,2007 DRAFT ACTION MEMO SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION Attachment I The Commission agreed that the applicant had appropriately addressed the issues related to pedestrian access to Berkeley by contacting the adjoining owners. Regarding the recommendation for denial, Mr. Cilimberg asked if it was based on the unfavorable factors identified by staff that had not been committed to by the applicant. There were some things that the applicant said at tonight's meeting that they would address. In addition, he asked if the Commission's recommendation was also based on the lack of a provision of affordable units physically located in the project. Mr. Zobrist asked that Mr. Strucko's concern be added about the fact that there is no policy in place for protecting the rural areas as opposed to the development areas. He does not want to overload the development areas until there is a current policy to protect the rural areas. Mr. Strucko agreed, but questioned if that was part of the motion or the sediment of the other Commissioners. Mr. Cannon noted that he felt the same way, but it was not part of his vote on this. The Commission agreed with Mr. Cilimberg's summary. The motion for denial passed by a vote of 7:0. Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2007-0004, Oakleigh Farm will go before the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for denial on December 12, 2007. The recommendation for denial was based on the following reasons: 1. Impacts on public facilities are not appropriately offset through proffers meeting the County's cash proffer policy or the provision of public improvements. 2. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall had not been provided 3. The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project. The Planning Commission took a 10 minute break at 7:26 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 7:37 p.m. Work Sessions: ZMA-2007-00016 Watkins 250 Rezoning PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.0 acres from R1 - Residential (1 uniUacre) to HC Highway Commercial which allows commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre) for a Landscape Contracting business PROFFERS: No EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT-3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: 5168 Rockfish Gap Turnpike/Route 250 West, east of Radford Lane & adjacent to Clover Lawn TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 56, Parcels 107C & 98D MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall (Rebecca Ragsdale) In summary, a work session on ZMA-2007-00016, Watkins 250 Rezoning was held by the Planning Commission. In a power point presentation, staff summarized and provided an overview of the ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 30, 2007 6 DRAFT ACTION MEMO SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION . . . PROFFER STATEMENT Date: November 16, 2007 ZMA#: 2007-00004 Oakleigh Farm Tax Map and Parcel Number: Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A 8.822 acres to be rezoned from R6 Residential to Neighborhood Model District (NMD) in accord with the General Development Plan entitled "Rezoning Request for Oakleigh Farm," prepared by Terra Concepts, PC, revised through November 16,2007 (the "General Development Plan") Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, is the fee simple owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A (the "Property") which is the subject of the zoning map amendment application #ZMA 2007-00004 known as "Oakleigh Farm." The Applicant for Oakleigh Farm is also Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC. The Oakleigh Farm community is herein referred to as the "Project." Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, Owner hereby voluntary proffers the conditions listed in this Proffer Statement, which shall be applied to the Property if the rezoning is approved by Albemarle County. These conditions are proffered as part of the rezoning and it is agreed that the conditions are reasonable. 1. Affordable Housinl!. A. 15% Affordable Requirement. The Owner shall provide a mixture of affordable housing units and cash in lieu of affordable housing units equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project (the "15% Affordable Requirement"). The affordable housing mixture shall be comprised as follows: (i). The Owner shall provide affordable housing dwelling units equal to at least seven and one-half percent (7.5%) of the total residential. dwelling units within the Project in the form of for-sale or for-lease affordable dwelling units as described in this paragraph I (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of one or more of the following unit types: single-family attached housing (townhouses or duplexes), condominiums or single family detached units. The Owner or its successor in interest reserves the right to provide the Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or any combination. (ii) In lieu of each additional affordable dwelling unit that would otherwise be required to meet the remainder of the 15% Affordable Requirement for affordable housing within the Project after the Owner has provided the Affordable Dwelling Units referenced in the prior paragraph, the Owner shall make a cash contribution to Albemarle County for the affordable housing program in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) for each such unit (the "Affordable Housing Cash Proffer") as described herein. For Attachment III example, if the total number of residential dwelling units within the Project is one hundred nine (109), 16 Affordable Units would be required to meet the 15% requirement. The Owner shall provide eight (8) Affordable Dwelling Units to satisfy the 7.5% requirement of paragraph IA(i), and One Hundred Fifty-Two Thousand, Eight Hundred Dollars ($152,800.00) ($19,100 x 8) to satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1A(ii). (iii). If the 15% Affordable Requirement has not already been satisfied as determined by the County pursuant to these proffers prior to the issuance of the building permits for each of buildings C, D, and H shown on the General Development Plan, the Owner shall either demonstrate to the County's satisfaction that at least 15% of the residential dwelling units in such building will be Affordable Dwelling Units, or the Owner shall pay the Affordable Housing Cash Proffer to the County in lieu of each Affordable Dwelling Unit that would otherwise be required to be paid to achieve the 15% Affordable Requirement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the Owner may "carry-over" or "bank" credits for affordable units in the event previously built buildings within the Project provided more than 15% Affordable Units or have paid the Affordable Housing Cash Proffer for an equivalent number of units ("Affordable Credits") and such additional Affordable Credits may be allocated toward the fifteen percent (15%) minimum for the buildings that remain of buildings C, D and H as shown on the General Development Plan. B. For-Sale Affordable Units. The for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units shall be affordable to households with incomes up to eighty percent (80%) of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that the housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes, and homeowner's insurance (PIT!) do not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income, provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such affordable units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400) or sixty-five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a "silent" second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein. All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any "silent" second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing. For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. C. For-Lease Affordable Dwelling Units. (i) The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit shall not exceed the then- current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office. In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such 2 . for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this Proffer I B shall apply for a period of ten (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). (ii). Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for- lease Affordable Dwelling Units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this Paragraph I(C). In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-lease Affordable Dwelling Unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term, shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this Paragraph I (C). Prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-lease Affordable Dwelling Unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this Paragraph I (C)(ii) have been satisfied. . (iii). Reporting Rental Rates. During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent Affordable Unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. D. Notification Period; Countv Cash Option. (i). Notification Period. All purchasers of the Affordable Dwelling Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The then-current owner/builder shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Unites). The ninety (90) day period shall commence upon written notice from the then-current ownerlbuilder that the Unites) is within one hundred twenty (120) days of completion and, that on or before the end of such one hundred twenty (120) day period shall be ready for occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser who executes a contract of purchase during this ninety (90) day period, the then-current ownerlbuilder shall have the right to sell or lease the Unites) without any restriction on sales or lease price or income of the purchaser(s), provided, however, that any Unites) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. The requirements of this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each of the Affordable Dwelling Units that are purchased. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current ownerlbuilder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for the Affordable Units. . (ii). County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the Property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then- 3 current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each affordable unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then-current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). If all of any portion of the cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within five (5) years of the date it was contributed, all unexpended funds shall be refunded to the party that contributed the funds. For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Unites) will be available for sale. E. Inspections. The County shall have the right, upon reasonable notice and subject to all applicable privacy laws, to periodically inspect the records of the Owner or any successors in interest for the purposes of assuring compliance with this paragraph 1. 2. Cash for Capital Improvements Proe;ram. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contributions shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e., schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contribution shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit in the following amounts: (i) Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. (ii). Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each single family attached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. (iii). Zero Dollars ($0.00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit. 3. Annual Adiustment of Cash Proffers. Beginning January 1, 2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/kIa Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year. For 4 . . . each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 4. Tree Preservation. The Owner has submitted as part of the Code of Development for Oakleigh Farm a tree protection plan (the "Tree Plan") for thirty-nine (39) trees within the Project, as shown on the Tree Plan, which specifies tree protection methods and procedures, including fertilizing, tree protection fencing and mulching which shall be complied with during and after development of the Project. Prior to the final site plan approval, the Owner shall submit a bond or other form of surety in the total amount of Twenty-Nine Thousand Dollars ($29,000). The bond or surety shall be submitted to guaranty the replacement of those trees which are numbered 1, lA, 2, 3,4, 4A, 5,6,7,8,9,10,14,16,17,19,20,21,22,24,25, 27A, 30,31,32,35,38, 38A, and 44D on the Tree Plan (the "Bonded Trees")in the event that any of the Bonded Trees die within a period of five (5) years after issuance of the first residential building permit within the Project. The bond or other surety shall be in a form acceptable to the County Engineer and the County Attorney. 5. Emereencv Accesswav. The Owner shall design and construct an emergency accessway into the Project in the northwest comer of the Project, the use of which shall be only for emergency ingress and egress by emergency vehicles (the "Emergency Accessway"). The Emergency Accessway shall be constructed using pervious parking pavers or other materials sufficient to support fire and other emergency vehicles, but that support grass or other ground cover, in conjunction with the construction of the streets serving the remainder of the Project. The Emergency Accessway shall be dedicated to public use upon request by the County. 6. Pedestrian Easement. The Homeowners' Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Project shall contain a provision which grants, or directs the Homeowners' Association to grant, a pedestrian easement over all walkways which directly connect with property outside of the Project. WITNESS the following duly authorized signatures: Owner: OAKLEIGH ALBEMARLE, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company By: Printed Name: Title: 1 479905v6 5 . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: October 30, 2007 December 12, 2007 Owners: George Ray Applicant: Terra Concepts represented by Steve Edwards Acreage: 8.82 Rezone: 8.82 acres from R-6 to Neighborhood Model District TMP: Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A By-right use: 53 dwelling units and up to 78 dwelling units with a density bonus or other Location: 547 Rio Road West (Route 631) supporting uses permitted in R-6 such as directly across the street from Woodburn Road schools, churches, and clubs by special use (Route 659) (See Attachments A and B) permit. I Project Name: ZMA 07-04 Oakleigh Farm I Magisterial District: Rio Proposal: Rezone to provide 109 dwelling units and up to 28,800 square feet of commercial space. DA (Development Area): Neighborhood One Character of Property: Along Rio Road the property contains an open pasture which is roughly 1/3 of the property. The remaining 2/3 of the property contains mature trees, a house, barn, bomb shelter, and a few smaller areas not covered by mature tree canopy. Factors Favorable: 1. The proposal meets most of the principles of the Neighborhood Model. 2. The applicant is proposing to preserve 39 of the existing mature trees. 1 I Staff: Claudette Grant I Proffers: Yes Requested # of Dwelling Units: 109 Compo Plan Designation: Urban Density Residential Use of Surrounding Properties: Along Rio Road, Berkmar Crossing lies to the east of the property and the Garden Spot lies to the west. A small townhouse community is across Rio Road from the property. Heritage Hall is adjacent to the parcel at the back of the property and the Berkeley subdivision lies to the South. The intersection of Rio Road and U.S. Route 29 is approximately 1/3 of a mile away. Factors Unfavorable: 1. Impacts on public facilities are not appropriately offset through proffers meeting the County's cash proffer policy or the provision of public improvements. 2. Timing of payment for affordable units needs to be better addressed. 3. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall needs to be addressed. 4. The pedestrian connection to Berkeley needs to be addressed. 5. The limitation of square footage for retail vs. office use needs to be clearly stated in the Code of Development and be cOflsistent with the plan and proffer. Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hea~ing 10/30/07 6. An easement or agreement allowing the interconnection of adjacent property needs to be provided. 7. The proffers need technical revisions. 8. The Code of Development needs technical revisions. 9. ARB comments need to be addressed. RECOMMENDATION: Without resolution of the aforementioned outstanding issues, staff cannot recommend approval. Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend approval of this proposal to the Board inclusive of proffers, code of development, and the general development plan, staff recommends that this recommendation be based on resolution of the nine (9) outstanding issues listed above before the Board acts on this rezoning. . . 2 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . . . STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: ZMA 2007- 004 Oakleiah Farm Request for approval of parking waiver Claudette Grant October 30, 2007 December 12, 2007 PETITION PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.82 acres from R-6 zoning district which allows residential uses and 6 units/acre to NMD - Neighborhood Model zoning district which allows residential mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses and 3 - 34 units/acre. Proposed number of units is 109 for a density of 12.3 units/acre. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Urban Density Residential - residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses. Neighborhood 1 ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: 547 Rio Road West (Route 631) directly across the street from Woodburn Road (Route 659) TAX MAP/PARCEL: TM: 45/P: 26A MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio CHARACTER OF THE AREA The property is located at 547 Rio Road West (Route 631) directly across the street from Woodburn Road (Route 659). The portion of this property adjacent to Rio Road contains an open pasture, which is roughly 1/3 of the property. The remaining 2/3 of the property contains mature trees, a house, barn, bomb shelter, and a few smaller areas not covered by a mature tree canopy. Berkmar Crossing, a commercial property, is adjacent to the east of the subject property and the Garden Spot, a landscape business is located to the west. A small townhouse community is located across Rio Road from the property. Heritage Hall, an elderly residential facility, is adjacent to the parcel at the rear of the property and the Berkeley residential subdivision lies to the South. The intersection of Rio Road and U.S. Route 29 is approximately 1/3 of a mile away. SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL The applicant would like to rezone one parcel from R-6, residential to NMD, Neighborhood Model District. The proposal would include the development of 109 dwelling units, and up to 28,000 sq. ft. of commercial space. The primary entrance to this development would be on Rio Road with an interconnection to the adjacent Berkmar Crossing property. At the front of the property, the applicant is proposing residential uses on top of commercial space. The remainder of the parcel is proposed to be developed with a variety of residential units in the form of townhouses, multifamily, and two single family cottages surrounding an open space/green area in which the applicant intends to maintain a number of existing stately oak trees. The applicant has provided copies of the Code of Development for the Commission to review. The Code of Development has a number of technical deficiencies that must be resolved prior to rezoning approval. (See Attachment C) APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST The applicant proposes to provide a mixed-use development in keeping with the neighborhood model principles within the development area that complements the existing surroundings, respects the history of the property and provides some protection to the natural features of the site. 3 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . . . PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY Prior to 1980 this property was zoned R-2, residential. The applicant has stated that the property was owned by the Nuttycombe family from at least 1897 until 2002 when Louise Nuttycombe died. This property has been parceled off over the years. A house was built on the site in 1990. After the sale of the property in 2006, a building on the site, which was the old farm house was removed by demolition. BACKGROUND A work session with the Planning Commission was held on June 19, 2007 in order to introduce the Commission to the project, provide an opportunity for public comment and discuss the following issues: · The appropriateness of the applicant's proposed commercial uses · The necessity of a buffer to screen the proposal from adjacent properties · The need to bond trees that are proposed to be retained · The need to investigate a pedestrian connection to Berkeley subdivision · The proposed form and massing along Rio Road and the way that form relates to existing structures along Rio. Since the work session, the applicant decided to provide revisions to the code of development and increase the residential units from 101 to 109. The applicant has agreed to limit the square footage of retail space to 14,400 square feet as requested by the Planning Commission and provide the balance of non-residential space for office use, bringing the total non-residential square footage in this development to 28,000 square feet. The entrance to the site has been reconfigured as requested by the Planning Commission, so that it lines up with Woodburn Rd. During the work session, the slip ramp was discussed as an emergency entrance. The applicant has provided the slip ramp for emergency situations only and the County Engineer is satisfied with this solution. The Commission asked the applicant to discuss the addition of a screening buffer with the adjacent Heritage Hall property owner(s). The revised plan shows an amenity area adjacent to the Heritage Hall property. The applicant has not indicated or provided information regarding a discussion with Heritage Hall about this issue. The Commission also agreed that the applicant should attempt to provide a pedestrian connection to Berkeley by meeting with residents of Berkeley. The applicant has not indicated or provided information regarding a meeting with the residents of Berkeley regarding this issue. A detailed summary of questions asked of the Commission and the Commission's response is provided in Attachment D. CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Urban Density residential at a density of between 6.01 to 20 dwellings per acre, with possible densities of up to 34 dwellings per acre under a planned development approach. The Comprehensive- Plan does not contain any specific recommendations related to this parcel or its immediate surroundings. The following recommendations guide the Urban Density Designation: · Urban Density Residential areas are intended to accommodate all dwelling types as well as institutional uses such as places of worship, public and private schools, and early childhood education centers including day care centers and preschools. · Urban Density Residential designations are not intended for development at densities below 6 dwellings per acre. · Developments within an Urban Density Residential area are expected to occur 4 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . within the designated range of 6.01 to 34 dwelling units per acre and, to the greatest extent practicable, to maximize the developed density with a form in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. · Development densities within the Urban Density Residential area should ultimately be based on environmental criteria, road function and condition, available utilities, adjacent land uses, and site requirements. · It is anticipated that Urban Density Residential areas will accommodate areas of nonresidential land uses on the scale of Neighborhood Service and Office Service as defined later in the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Based on the preceding recommendations for Urban Density residential, staff believes the residential component of the applicant's proposal is in keeping with the Urban Density residential designation. Specifically, the applicant is proposing a mix of residential uses (townhouse, multifamily, and condos above commercial space) at a density of 12.3 units per acre. Regarding the non-residential uses, the Comprehensive Plan recommends that neighborhood commercial-scaled uses be less than 40,000 sq. ft. and that office-service scaled uses be less than 150,000 sq. ft. The applicant proposes a maximum of 28,000 sq. ft. of non- residential space on his property for office and retail/service uses. . The following information was part of the original analysis provided to the Planning Commission. During the work session, the Planning Commission responded to the issue regarding commercial square footage by limiting the amount of square feet of retail use, and as previously mentioned in this report, the applicant has responded accordingly. As discussed at the Planning Commission worksession, the project is proposed adjacent to Berkmar Crossing, which has a Commercial Service designation in the Comprehensive Plan and provides a total of 111,000 sq. ft. of non-residential space with 81,000 sq. ft. in office space and 30,000 sq. ft. in retail and service uses. The appropriateness of Neighborhood Service scaled commercial in the Urban Density Residential is based on the existing context and existing availability of services and general mix of uses. Further, it should also be noted that Neighborhood Model District zoning should ideally contain a mix of residential and non- residential uses. If commercial uses did not exist adjacent to the subject property, the applicant's proposal for (28,000 sq. ft of commercial with 109 dwelling units) would be an excellent response to the Neighborhood Model. The Planning Commission requested that the applicant reduce the square footage of retail to 14,400 sq. ft. because of the existing commercial uses in the area. While the applicant is providing a maximum of 28,000 sq. ft. of non-residential uses, which includes office uses with the maximum 14,400 sq. ft. of retail uses, this commitment is not consistent or clearly depicted in the code of development and plan. Nearby neighborhood service areas include a mix of office and retail/service uses at Four Seasons, which is less than a mile away. The U.S. Route 29 corridor, also less than a mile away, contains community and regional service-scaled commercial development. Given the availability of office and retail/service uses adjacent to the site and in the immediate area, it may be that the applicant's proposal is In excess of what the neighborhood needs based on its designation. . 5 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 Principles of the Neighborhood Model -- Conformity with the Neighborhood Model is assessed eelow: Pedestrian Orientation Neighborhood Friendly Streets and Paths Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks Parks and Open Space Neighborhood Centers Buildings and Spaces of Human Scale Relegated Parking Mixture of Uses Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability Redevelopment ite Planning that Respects Terrain 6 Sidewalks are provided along Rio Road and Berkmar Drive, which will provide convenient access from the Oakleigh development to other nearby commercial uses, and public transportation. Within the Oakleigh development sidewalks and pathways are shown through out the development making this a pedestrian friendly development. However, during the worksession, the Planning Commission said that the applicant should attempt to provide a pedestrian connection to Berkeley. The applicant did not provide information confirming a meeting took place with the residents of Berkele . This rinci Ie is not met. The streets in Oakleigh are primarily designed as travelways. Slow traffic speeds, low traffic volumes, and landscaped roadways with sidewalks will help to make the streets and paths neighborhood friendly. This principle is met. Interconnection is shown on the plan into the Berkmar Crossing development. This interconnection will help facilitate the transportation network related to Oakleigh Farm because there is a traffic signal at one of the Berkmar Crossing accesses and Rio Road. The access from Rio Road to the Oakleigh Farm development is not proposed to be signalized. Easements or agreements allowing this interconnection will need to be provided prior to the rezoning. With provision of an easement or agreement this rinci Ie is met. There will be a park located in the center of the development where many of the older large trees will be preserved. Benches, paths and gardens will help facilitate this space into a park like environment. Additional amenities to the site will be a tot lot for children. This rinci Ie is met. The park area and commercial space within the Oakleigh development ma serve as centers to area residents. This rinciple is met. The correct height of the proposed buildings is not known due to discrepancies in the visionary statement and the Code of Development related to building heights. There is not enough information to determine if this principle is met. Although some of the parking in block two will be provided underneath the residential structures and in garages, some of this parking will also be provided to the front and side of buildings. Parking is also shown in Block one in front of Building B. The applicant has taken out some of the parking spaces in front of Building B at the request of the ARB, which now satisfies the ARB. Staff believes that parking would be better relegated if Building B were ad'acent to Rio Rd. This principle is met in part. This development proposes commercial uses in the two buildings located in block one with residential uses located above this commercial space and residential uses located in block 2. This rinci Ie is met. The applicant proposes to provide townhouses, apartments, condominiums and single-family detached cottages. A proffer is also provided that provides cash to the County in the amount based on the County's affordable housin olic. This rinci Ie is met. Oaklei h Farm is an example of an infill develo ment. The applicant is making a large effort to preserve many of the existing mature trees on the site and do as little grading as possible. This principle is met. Oakl'aigh Farm PC Public Hearinp 10/30/07 . . Clear Boundaries with the Rural Areas This development is located in the development area. This principle is not applicable. STAFF COMMENT Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district: The purpose and intent of the Neighborhood Model District (NMD) is to establish a planned development district in which traditional neighborhood development, as established in the County's Neighborhood Model, will occur. The NMD provides for compact, mixed-use developments with an urban scale, massing, density and an infrastructure configuration that integrates diversified uses within close proximity to each other within the development areas identified in the comprehensive plan. The existing Residential (R-6) zoning district provides for compact, medium-density residential development; permits a variety of housing types; and provides incentives for clustering of development and provision of locational, environmental and developmental amenities. Staff believes that the proposal meets the intent of the Neighborhood Model District (NMD). Public need and justification for the change: The County's Comprehensive Plan supports development in the designated development area that is consistent with use, density, and form recommended in the Plan. Oakleigh Farm uses and form are viewed as being generally in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. Impact on Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Resources: None of the environmental features is shown on the County's Open Space Plan, although the trees on the site are considered by many to be important resources. To respond, the applicant has provided a proffer for tree preservation as well as sections within the Code of Development regarding tree preservation efforts. Regarding historical resources, the only resources identified on the site in the Open Space Plan is the Nuttycombe farmhouse which dates to 1897. Prior to the applicant purchasing this property, a demolition permit was approved and the previous owner demolished that historic resource. Anticipated impact on public facilities and services: Streets: Although this project will increase traffic to an already high volume traffic road and area, as shown in the traffic study the relatively small to medium size of this project will not add any more impacts to this already high impacted area. (See Attachment E) Water and Sewer: Despite follow-up requests to the Albemarle County Service Authority, the only information staff has been given regarding this property from the Albemarle County Service Authority is provided in Attachment I. This attachment relates to a by-right proposal (Oakleigh Townhomes) located on the same tax map and parcel as the Oakleigh Farms proposal. This attachment is dated June 29,2005. (See Attachment I) Schools: Children from this development would attend Agnor-Hurt Elementary School, Burley Middle School and Albemarle High School. This development is expected to generate approximately 13.7 elementary school pupils, 7.23 middle school pupils, and 6.2 high school pupils. Fire. Rescue, Police: The Seminole Trail fire - rescue station serves this site. Albemarle County 5th Street Office Building contains the County's Police Department, although the police patrol all areas of the 7 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . County. Current policy of police services recommends an average response time of 10 minutes for all Development Areas. No impact to these facilities is expected. Stormwater Management: The applicant proposes managing the entire volume of storm water from this development through underground detention and storm water management ponds. In general, this approach is acceptable in the County's urban areas. The general development plan indicates the applicant will address storm water quality and quantity through the system proposed. Engineering has no objection with the management concepts proposed. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties: The residential and commercial aspects of this project are very much in keeping with the existing surrounding properties, which are also comprised of residential and commercial uses. However, this property is primarily wooded, which adds a particular characteristic and level of privacy for the adjacent properties. As previously mentioned in this report, during the Planning Commission work session, the Commission discussed the provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall. Most of the Commissioners agreed with staff that a parking-driveway setback of 10 feet and a continuous screening buffer would allow for screening in the future should the existing wooded areas on the Heritage Hall property be eliminated. The Commission asked the applicant to discuss this issue with Heritage Hall. The applicant has not indicated if this discussion has occurred. . ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD COMMENT The proposed Oakleigh Farm development falls within Rio Road Entrance Corridor, therefore, this project was reviewed by the ARB on September 17, 2007. (See Attachments F and G) In summary: . The ARB suggested revised proffer language in order to address replacement/compensation for existing mature trees in the event that they die. . The ARB felt revisions should be made to the code of development regarding landscaping along the eastern property line, east of Buildings Band D. · At the ARB meeting the ARB requested the Architectural Standards required for the code of development be submitted for their review. The applicant has since revised the code of development to include this information; however, the ARB has not reviewed this information as yet. CODE OF DEVELOPMENT There are many technical changes needed to the code of development; however, they are things that do not require Planning Commission involvement and staff believes the applicant can address them before the Board of Supervisors hearing. Staff believes the following substantive issues need resolution before all changes to the Code can be made. · Whether a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall should be provided. · Whether a pedestrian connection to Berkeley shou~d be made. . . Confirmation that the applicant will have only 14,400 sq. ft. devoted to retail since it is not clearly stated within the code of development and consistent with the plan. · An easement or agreement will need to be submitted prior to the rezoning that allows the interconnection to occur between Oakleigh Farm and Berkmar Crossing. 8 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . PROFFERS Proffer 1. Affordable Housing: The applicant will contribute cash in the amount of $19,100 for each affordable unit to the County. Sixteen units or a cash equivalent should be provided for 16.35 units. The total cash will be provided for 15% affordable housing units and should reflect the portion of an affordable unit. Also the applicant has proposed 16 payments over the course of the project. Staff believes that having the cash provided in four payments would be preferable. Proffer 2. Cash for Capital Improvements Program: The applicant proposes a cash contribution to the County in the amount of $3,204.59 for each dwelling unit for the mitigation of impacts from the project for schools, libraries, fire, rescue, parks, transportation or any other public use serving Neighborhood One. Staff believes that, to mitigate impacts, this amount should reflect the County policy of: . · $17,500 per single family detached (sfd) unit . $11,900 per townhouse/condominium . $12,400 per multi-family/apartment. Based on 2 single family detached units, 91 single family attached/townhouse units, and 16 multi-family units, the total expected amount would be $1,316,300. The total amount provided in the proffers is $349,300.00 The applicant disagrees and believes that the Board of Supervisors intended that credit should be given for 52 units that could be built by-right,. The applicant also believes that credit should be given for preservation of some of the trees on the site. Staff does not believe that the Board intended for credit to be given in either of these two circumstances. If cash proffers are provided, the total that addresses the impacts of this project on public facilities based on County . policy is $1,316,300. Proffer 3. Annual Adjustment of Cash Proffers: The amount of each cash contribution required shall be adjusted annually until paid. This is based on the Consumer Price Index. This language will be revised to be consistent with other similar proffers to the County. Proffer 4. Tree Preservation: The applicant proposes in the Code of Development a tree protection plan for thirty nine (39) trees within Oakleigh Farm. ARB Staff has suggested some additional language regarding this proffer. (See ,A,ttachment G) Proffer 5. Limitation on Retail use of Commercial Space: This proffer limits the non-residential space within the project to Buildings A and B on t.he Application Plan and limits the square footage of non-residential space for retail uses. The Code and Plan need to be consistent with each other and the proffer. Proffer 6. Emergency Accessway: The applicant shall design and construct an emergency accessway into the project in the northwest corner for emergency use only. At this time, staff is unclear whether this commitment is necessary as a proffer but will advise at the Planning Commission meeting. Proffer 7. Pedestrian Easement: This proffer directs the Homeowner's Association to grant a pedestrian easement over all walkways, which directly connect with property outside of Oakleigh Farm. . In addition to these comments, the proffers are in need of technical and language revisions. (See Attachment H) 9 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . WAIVERS Staff does not have the necessary information regarding the parking calculations in order to determine a recommendation for the parking waiver request. Therefore, the parking waiver request cannot be recommended for approval until the parking calculations are corrected in the Code of Development. SUMMARY Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request: 1. The proposal meets most of the principles of the Neighborhood Model. 2. The applicant is proposing to preserve 39 of the existing mature trees. 4. 5. . 6. 7. 8. 9. The following lists substantive and technical issues, some of which regard the proffers that are still outstanding and unfavorable to this rezoning request: . 1. Impacts on public facilities are not appropriately offset through proffers meeting the County's cash proffer policy or the provision of public improvements. 2. Timing of payment for affordable units needs to be better addressed. 3. The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall needs to be addressed. The pedestrian connection to Berkeley needs to be addressed. The limitation of square footage for retail vs. office use needs to be clearly stated in the Code of Development and be consistent with the plan and proffer. An easement or agreement allowing the interconnection of adjacent property needs to be provided. The proffers need technical revisions. The Code of Development needs technical revisions. ARB comments need to be addressed. RECOMMENDATION Without resolution of the aforementioned outstanding issues, staff cannot recommend approval. Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend approval of this proposal to the Board inclusive of proffers, code of development, and the general development plan, staff recommends that this recommendation be based on resolution of the nine (9) outstanding issues listed above before the Board acts on this rezoning. . ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A - Tax Map ATTACHMENT B - Location Map ATTACHMENT C - Code of Development ATTACHMENT D - Planning Commission Final Action Memo, dated June 19, 2007 ATTACHMENT E - Electronic Mail from Joel Denunzio-VDOT, dated October 23,2007 ATTACHMENT F - Letter to Mr. Edwards from Margaret Maliszewski, dated October 8,2007 ATTACHMENT G - Memo from Margaret Maliszewski, dated October 17,2007 ATTACHMENT H - Proffers, dated September 4,2007 ATTACHMENT I - Memo from Gary Whelan, dated June 29, 2005 10 Oakleigh Farm PC Public Hearing 10/30/07 . --~ / i ZMA 2007-004 (;} \\Oakleigh'--Farm~' . \ ~ . /'-V Roads ~ Water Body CJ Driveways c::J Parcels CJ Buildings Parcel of Interest < ..... = ~ a -= <:J ~ ..... ..... < . . . ~ ,.. = ~ e -= ~ C': ,.. ,.. < CJ Parcels Streams _ Parcel of Interest . Water Body . . . Albemarle County Planning Commission June 19, 2007 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and public hearing on Tuesday, June 19, 2007, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Members attending were Bill Edgerton, Eric Strucko, Pete Craddock, Calvin Morris, Vice-Chairman; Duane Zobrist and Marcia Joseph, Chairman. Absent was Jon Cannon. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia was absent. Mr. Strucko arrived at 6:07 p.m. Mr. Craddock arrived at 6:09 p.m. Other officials present were Elaine Echols, Principal Planner, Mark Graham, Director of Community Development, John Shepherd, Chief of Current Development; David Pennock, Principal Planner; Sean Dougherty, Senior Planner; Joan McDowell, Principal Planner and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney. Call to Order and Establish Quorum: Ms. Joseph called the meeting order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public: Ms. Joseph invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda. There being none, the meeting moved on to the next item. Deferred Item: SP2007 -00010 Cutright Development Right (Sign #111 & 112) - DEFERRED FROM JUNE 5 PC MEETING PROPOSED: Special Use Permit to acquire two additional development rights ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) SECTION: 10.2.2 (28) Divisions of land as provided in section 10.5.2.1. and Section 10.5.2.1 Where permitted by Special Use Permit COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (.5 unit/ acre); Entrance Corridor - Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access; Flood Hazard - Overlay to provide safety and protection from flooding ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: YES LOCATION: 3544 Red Hill School Road; southeast corner of Red Hill School Road (RT. 760) and Monacan Trail Road (RT 29) - North Garden TAX MAP/PARCEL: 88-6A1 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Samuel Miller (Joan McDowell) ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19, 2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 1 Attachment D . . . Motion: Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded, to deny SP-2007-00010, Cutright Development Right for the reasons stated in the staff report. Mr. Craddock asked to add the provision that the Board of Supervisors and all parties involved look at this as strongly as possible to see if they can make it work. Ms. Joseph asked staff to get with the tax assessors to see if the 4 acres could be put in an easement to relieve the burden of taxes. Mr. Zobrist asked for an amended motion to deny SP-2007 -00010, Cutright Development Right with a request to the Board of Supervisors to look at the request very carefully because the Commission would like to approve it, but the County rules don't give the Commission the power to do so. Amended Motion: Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded, to amend the motion to deny SP-2007-00010, Cutright Development Right for the reasons stated in the staff report with a request to the Board of Supervisors to look at the request very carefully. The Commission could not recommend approval because it did not conform to the Comp Plan and would set a precedent. Therefore, the Commission asked the applicant and Fire Department to find other ways to do this. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Cannon was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that SDP-2007-00010, Cutright Development Right will go before the 80ard of Supervisors on July 11 with a recommendation for denial, but the Commission hopes that in the interim something can be figured out. SUB2007-00120 Pounding Branch Subdivision (Phase II) - Preliminary - DEFERRED FROM MAY 22ND PC MEETING Request for preliminary subdivision plat approval to create 20 lots [18 development lots and two (2) preservation lots] as a Rural Preservation Development on 299.1 acres. The property, described as Tax Map 72 - Parcel 52 and Parcel 368, is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on Dick Woods Road [Route 637] approximately .07 miles [422 feet] northeast of the intersection with Pounding Creek Road [Route 689]. The Comprehensive Plan designates Parcel 52 and Parcel 368 as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3. (Megan Yaniglos) APPLICANT REQUESTING DEFFERAL - PLANNING COMMISSION DATE TO BE DETERMINED SUB2007-00135 Pounding Branch Subdivision (Phase III) - Preliminary Request for preliminary subdivision plat approval to create 20 lots [18 development lots and two (2) preservation lots] as a Rural Preservation Development on 299.1 acres. The property, described as Tax Map 72 - Parcel 52 and Parcel 368, is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on Dick Woods Road [Route 637] approximately .07 miles [422 feet] northeast of the intersection with Pounding Creek Road [Route 689]. The Comprehensive Plan designates Parcel 52 and Parcel 368 as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3. (Megan Yaniglos) APPLICANT REQUESTING DEFFERAL - PLANNING COMMISSION DATE TO BE DETERMINED ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19,2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 2 . . . Motion: Mr. Edgerton moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to approve the applicant's request for deferral of SUB-2007-00120, Pounding Branch Subdivision (Phase II) - Preliminary and SUB-2007-00135, Pounding Branch Subdivision (Phase III). The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Cannon was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that SUB-2007-00120, Pounding Subdivision (Phase II) Preliminary and SUB-2007-00135 (Phase III) - Preliminary were deferred to a date to be determined. Regular Items: SDP2007 -00048 Crozet Gateway Center - Critical Slopes Waiver This proposal is for a waiver of Section 4.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance in order to allow the disturbance of critical slopes for purposes of construction of 2 buildings totaling 29,680 square feet for commercial and office use on 1.99 acres zoned HC Highway Commercial and EC Entrance Corridor. The property, described as Tax Map 56, Parcels 32 and 32A are located in the Whitehall Magisterial District in the northeast corner of the intersection of Route 240 (Brownsville Road) and Route 250 (Rockfish Gap Turnpike). This is currently the site of a convenience store. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Crozet Community. (David Pennock) Motion: Mr. Strucko moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to approve SDP-2007-00048, Crozet Gateway Center - Critical Slopes Waiver. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Cannon was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that SDP-2007 -00048, Crozet Gateway Center - Critical Slopes Waiver, was approved. Public Hearing Item: ZTA2007-0002 New enablina authority for acceptina proffers: Amend the Zonina Ordinance to accept proffers under the enablina authority of Virainia Code ~ 15.2- 2303 rather than under the currently utilized authority of Virainia Code ~ 15.2- 2298. . Proffers - Amend Sections 2.3, Conflicting Ordinances; 3.1, Definitions; and 33.3, Proffer of Conditions, of Chapter 18, Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code. This ordinance would amend the references to the state enabling authority for conditional zoning, amend the definition of "proffer," and would change the state enabling authority under which the County accepts proffers from Virginia Code 9 15.2-2298 to Virginia Code 9 15.2-2303. (Wayne Cilimberg) Motion: Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Strucko seconded, to approve ZTA-2007-0002 New enabling authority for accepting proffers to amend the Zoning Ordinance to accept ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIOI\' - JUNE 19, 2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 3 . proffers under the enabling authority of Virginia Code S15.2-2303 rather than under the currently used authority of Virginia Code S15.2-2298. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Cannon was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that ZTA-2007-0002, New enabling authority for accepting proffers will go to the Board of Supervisors on July 11 with a recommendation for approval. Work Session: . ZMA2007-00004 Oakleigh Farm (Sign # 62) PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.8 acres from R-6 Residential zoning district which allows residential uses at 6 units per acre to Neighborhood Model Zoning district which allows residential uses at 6- 34 units/acre mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. A maximum of 101 dwellings are proposed with a density of approximately 12 units per acre. PROFFERS: No (to be submitted later) EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: Rio Road West (Route 631) directly across the street from Woodburn Road (Route 659) in Neighborhood 1 TAX MAP/PARCEL: 45-26A MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio (Sean Dougherty) In summary. the Planning Commission held a work session on ZMA-2007-00004, Oakleigh Farm to discuss the major considerations listed in the staff report. Staff presented a power point presentation, summarized the information associated with this project and posed several questions for the Commission. Staff pointed out one change to the staff report that the applicant is considering potentially adding 8 development units to the front of the property, which would increase the unit count from 101 to 109 or 115. The applicant's representatives, Valerie Long and George Ray, gave a power point presentation, explained the proposal and answered questions. Public comment was taken. No formal action was taken. The Commission provided feedback to the discussion questions posed by staff, with 3 additional questions posed by the applicant, as follows: 1. Does the Commission Support the applicant's approach to residential density. open space. and non residential uses? The Planning Commission supports the applicant's approach to residential density, open space and non residential uses and the applicant's proposal to limit the retail . commercial use to 14,400 square feet. The non residential uses need to be worked out. Several concerns were expressed including: ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19, 2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 4 . . . · The applicant has agreed to work with VDOT on the reconfiguration of the entrance. The reconfiguration is going to make Building B larger, which could potentially become more retail area. The applicant has committed to the 14,400 square feet of retail commercial space. The scale. of non- residential use and how much of that space should be there is a concern. There is a concern about how much retail has been approved in rezonings and the absorption rate of 20 to 30 years. Should additional retail space be added to that in this project? The Commission was struggling with all of those things. The major concern was the parking located in front. Relegated parking was preferred to on street parking. · Woodburn is a public road and the roads in Oakleigh, including the entrance road, are being proposed as a private road. 2. Should the applicant be providing a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall (where existing wooded areas are located) so that if screening of the backs of townhouses proposed there would be possible should Heritage Hall expand and remove existing wooded areas. Four Commissioners (Joseph, Edgerton, Morris and Strucko) agreed with staff that a parking-driveway setback of 10 feet and a continuous screening buffer would allow for screening in the future should the existing wooded areas on the Heritage Hall property be eliminated. Two Commissioners (Craddock, Zobrist) were in favor of the applicant not providing a buffer. · The applicant was asked to discuss this issue with Heritage Hall. Since Heritage Hall owns both sides of the property they can abandon the lot line any time they wa nt. 3. Given the applicant's detailed analvsis of existing trees and plan to preserve those identified. should the applicant make a commitment to bond trees to ensure their survival. The Planning Commission agreed that the applicant should make a commitment to bond trees to ensure their survival and requested staff to investigate what has been done in the past. 4. Should the aqplicant attempt to provide a pedestrian connection to Berkelev? The Planning Commission agreed that the applicant should attempt to provide a pedestrian connection to Berkeley by meeting with the residents of Berkeley to determine the feasibility. The Commission supports interconnectivity. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19, 2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 5 . 5. Should the massina of the two buildinas proposed to front Rio work relate better to the neiahborina properties alona Rio Road? The Planning Commission felt that there was not enough information submitted to answer the question. The applicant needs to submit drawings and elevations to be reviewed prior to the Commission commending on this question. This request has not been before the ARB. Due to the lack of elevation drawings the Commission requested that the ARB review this request and provide their recommendation to the Commission. Other Matters The Commission provided the following responses to the additional questions. . 1. The Commission agreed with VDOT and the County Engineer that the entrance road should align with Woodburn Road across the street. 2. There is a slip ramp the applicant has shown. Engineering has requested to remove it. The applicant has said they might want to retain the slip ramp as an emergency entrance. The Commission asked for input from Fire Rescue on whether the slip-ramp would be beneficial as an emergency access only. The Commission asked staff to verify with VDOT that it was possible for the slip-ramp to be an emergency only access. Old Business Ms. Joseph asked if there was any old business. There being none, the meeting proceeded. New Business Ms Joseph asked if there was any new business. . · A request was made to add on an upcoming agenda a presentation by Greg Kamptner regarding the new VDOT rules and guidelines pertaining to traffic studies. Mr. Kamptner replied that it would be more appropriate for the engineers to discuss the technical issues regarding the traffic studies, but that he would cover the procedures. · Ms. Echols reported that Avinity and Rivanna Village requests were approved by the Board of Supervisors. o One issue changed from the Planning Commission's recommendation for Rivanna Village regarding the preservation of trees at the perimeter. The Commission had asked the applicant to work with the adjoining property owners on that issue. Staff pressed for the applicant to show a strong commitment to show the trees that were going to be preserved and where they were not preserving trees that there was a legitimate reason documented. The applicant did not feel that they could commit to that. Staff talked to the adjoining property owners and realized that they ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19, 2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 6 . . . misunderstood which trees would be preserved. So the anticipated changes did not get in the Code of Development, but the adjoining property owners were satisfied. o The applicant's cash proffer amount for Avinity was increased to address the Board of Supervisors expectations for cash proffers. Adjournment: With no further items, the meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. to Tuesday, June 26, 2007 Planning Commission meeting at 6:00 p.m. at the County Office Building, Second Floor, Auditorium, 401 Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Secretary (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon Claytor Taylor, Recording Secretary.) ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 19,2007 FINAL ACTION MEMO 7 ZMA-2007-004 Oakleigh Farm Page 1 of 1 Claudette Grant -_._"--"~----"-'~---'~--------"'-----'-"-"'--'-'--".---.--.-...--....-..---.----,-.,.....---.---...----..----.-.-. -"...._,_._--,.~----- - ----...-----.'-- ~-_.__..~"._---------,,_.~----""---- . From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [JoeI.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Tuesday, October 23,2007 12:57 PM To: Claudette Grant Subject: ZMA-2007-004 Oakleigh Farm ZMA-2007-004 Oakleigh Farm Claudette, I have reviewed the above rezoning application plan and have no comments. There are a couple of design issues that we can take care of in the preliminary and final site plan phase. These include lengthening the right turn land and providing sight distance easements. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer . 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 joel.denu nzio@vdot.virginia.gov . Attachment E 10/2312007 . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 October 8, 2007 Terra Concepts c/o Steve Edwards 224 Court Square Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ARB2007-00056 Oakleigh Farm Dear Mr. Edwards: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on September 17, 2007, completed an advisory review of the above-noted request to rezone 8.8 acres to Neighborhood Model zoning district. The Board by a vote of 4: 1 forwarded the following recommendation to the Planning Commission: The ARB can support the rezoning, subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the Code/Application Plan to address replacement or other compensation for the existing mature trees to remain, should they die. 2. Revise the Code to specify portable chain link for tree protection fencing. 3. The ARB's recommendation for support of the rezoning is based on the Master Plan as provided on September 17, 2007 with amendments to be made to the footprints of buildings A and B to reflect the changes as proposed in the elevations. (The buildings presented on September 17 have bays projecting from the ends.) 4. Reduce the parking between Building B and the EC. 5. Revise the Code and Application Plan to indicate that landscaping shown on the Application Plan and in the Code does not meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the Guidelines, as required by the ARB, and that additional planting area will be provided to accommodate the landscaping as required by the ARB. 6. Complete the "Architectural Standards" chapter of the Code and submit it for review. 7. Revise the Code to indicate that the information on page 56 relates to new street trees, not including those along Hydraulic Road. Revise the 3rd bullet on page 56 to clarify what "within reason" means. Revise the 4th bullet on page 56 to clarify what "in view from the street" means, to further clarify which trees are subject to this requirement, and to better compensate for trees that have grown larger than the replacement size or to mature size. 8. The ARB reserves the right to review Buildings A - D in detail. 9. Planting shall be created in front of the wall of Building A as indicated by the EC Guidelines. You may submit your application for preliminary ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms, checklists and schedules are available on-line at www."3Ibemarle.orqjplanninq. If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Margaret Maliszewski Principal Planner CC: Oakleigh Albemarle LLC 69 1 Berkmar Cir CharlottesvillE., Va 22901 File Attachment F . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 Mcintire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Claudette Grant Margaret Maliszewski Design Planning Comments on: ZMA-2007-04: OakIeigh Farm October 17,2007 (comments updated from October 16) I have reviewed the revised Code of Development and the General Development Plan Set dated September 30, 2007. I have the comments listed below. (I have asked the applicant for clarification regarding the first issue below and for clarification regarding the "Demolition Plan Phase 1" and "tree protection fencing installed as indicated" on page 72 of the Code, but I have not heard back from the applicant on these items.) Issue: Replacement/compensation for existing mature trees in the event that they die Comments: · On September 17, 2007 the ARB conducted an advisory review for the Oakleigh proposal. The ARB indicated that they could support the rezoning subject to conditions. One of those conditions reads as follows: "Revise the Code/Application Plan to address replacement or other compensation for the existing mature trees to remain, should they die." Proffer #4 addresses tree preservation for the existing trees. It proposes to bond $1000 for seven of the existing trees to remain (#7, 9, 17, 19, 30, 31, 32) to guaranty replacement of the trees if they die within two years of final site plan approval. · There are 94 trees in the inventory. 55 of those trees are to be removed; 39 are to remain. The applicant proposes to bond only 7 of those 39 trees. Of the 32 "non-bonded" trees to remain, 8 measure 30" caliper or greater and 7 measure 20-29" caliper. Of the 32 "non-bonded" trees to remain, 17 are located close to proposed grading and/or construction. · All of the existing trees to remain warrant additional protection in the form of bonding. In addition to the seven trees identified by the applicant, based on size and proximity to proposed work, the following 23 trees are of particular note: 1, 1 A, 2, 3,4, 4A, 5, 6, 8, 10, 14, 16,20,21,22,23,24,25,27 A, 35, 38, 38A, 440.23 trees comprises approximately 25% of the existing inventory of trees on site. · The two-year time period is insufficient to determine full impacts from construction. An 8-10 year time frame would better protect the trees in question. A time frame of less than 5 years should not be considered. · The time period should be tied to an event rhorc closely related to the activity that impacts the trees, such as the completion of construction or issuancll of a Certificate of Occupancy, not the approval of the final site plan, to better protect the trees in questioh, Recommendation: Revise Proffer #4 to address all ofthe existing trees to remain, to increase the time period to 10 years, and to tie the time period to an event that i~ more closely related to the activity th.at impacts the trees. Issue: Landscaping along thf eastern property line, east of Buildings Band D Comments: The EC Guideline:;, require perimeter parking trets and screening of dumpskr areas. Trees shown along the eastern property line, east of Buildings Band 0, are shown primarily off-site The ARB indicated Attachment G . . . that they could support the rezoning subject to conditions. One of the conditions recommended by the ARB reads as follows: "Revise the Code and Application Plan to indicate that landscaping shown on the Application Plan and in the Code does not meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the Guidelines, as required by the ARB, and that additional planting area will be provided to accommodate the landscaping as required by the ARB." A note was added on page 54 of the Code, but it does not address the "additional planting area". The additional planting area is required to meet the guidelines. Recommendation: Revise the note on page 54 of the Code that reads "Additional plantings may be required" to read "Additional plantings may be required and additional planting area shall be provided to accommodate the landscaping as required by the ARB." Issue: EC planting Comments: One of the conditi()ns recommended by the ARB reads, "Planting shall be created in front of the wall of Building A as indicated by the EC Guidelines." The revised plan shows trees added along the EC, but they are located off-site in the right-of-way. The applicant should be aware that the ARB is likely to require additional on-site planting in this area. Recommendation: The "additional plantings may be required" note, above, addresses this issue. Issue: Architectural Standards Comments: The Architectural Standards section of the Code has been completed. It should be noted that the ARB has not reviewed this section of the Code. Recommendation: None. . . . PROFFER STATEMENT Date: September 4, 2007 ZMA#: 2007-00004 Oakleigh Farm Tax Map and Parcel Number: Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A 8.822 acres to be rezoned from R6 to Neighborhood Model District (NMD) in accord with the Application Plan entitled "Rezoning Request for Oakleigh Farm," prepared by Terra Concepts, PC, revised through August 17,2007 (the "Application Plan") Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, is the fee simple owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 45, Parcel 26A (the "Property") which is the subject of the zoning map amendment application #ZMA 2007 -00004 known as "Oakleigh Farm." The Applicant for Oakleigh Farm is also Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC. The Oakleigh Farm community is herein referred to as the "Project." Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, Owner hereby voluntary proffers the conditions listed in this Proffer Statement, which shall be applied to the Property if the rezoning is approved by Albemarle County. These conditions are proffered as part of the rezoning and it is agreed that the conditions are reasonable. 1. Affordable Housin2. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County for affordable housing programs as follows: prior to the issuance of a building permit for the 7ili, 14ili, 215\ 28ili, 35th 42na 49ili 56ili 63rd 70th 77th 84ili 915t 98th 105th and 109tfi dwelling units within th , , , , , , , , , , e Project, the Owner shall, in each case, contribute cash to the County in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100). 2. Cash for Capital Improvements Pr02ram. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County for the purpose of mitigating impacts from the Project as described herein. The cash contribution shall be used for schools, libraries, fire, rescue, parks, transportation or any other public use serving Neighborhood One (as so defined in the County Comprehensive Plan) as identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contribution shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit within the Project, in the amount of Three ThousanJ Two Hundred Four Dollars and 59/1 OOs ($3,204.59) for each such dwelling unit. 3. Annual Ad iustment of Cash Proffer~. Beginning January 1, 2009, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, 1982-1984 = ] 00 (not seasonally adjusted) as reported by the United States Department of Labor, Burear. of Labor Statistics (the "CPI-U'). In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the p.'offered cash contribution amount for the Attachment H . . . preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the CPI-U as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the CPI-U as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 4. Tree Preservation. The Owner has submitted as part of the Code of Development for Oakleigh Farm a tree protection plan (the "Tree Plan") for thirty nine (39) trees within the Project, as shown on the Tree Plan, which specifies tree protection methods and procedures, including fertilizing, tree protection fencing and mulching which shall be complied with during and after development of the Project. Prior to the final site plan approval, the Owner also shall submit a bond or other form of surety in an amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each of the trees numbered 7, 9, 17, 19,30,31 and 32 on the Tree Plan (the "Bonded Trees"), to guaranty the replacement of the Bonded Trees in the event that any ofthe Bonded Trees die within a period of two (2) years after approval of the final site plan for the land on which the Bonded Trees are located. The bond or other surety shall be in a form acceptable to the County Engineer and the County Attorney. 5. Limitation on Retail Use of Commercial Space. The non-residential space within the , Project shall be located only within buildings A and B as shown on the Application Plan. No more than one-half (1/2) ofthe square footage of the total approved non-residential space shall be utilized for retail stores and shops as the term "retail stores and shops" is defined in the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. 6. Emere:encv Accesswav. The Owner shall design and construct an emergency accessway into the Project in the northwest comer of the Project, the use of which shall be only for emergency ingress and egress by emergency vehicles (the "Emergency Accessway"). The Emergency Accessway shall be constructed using pervious parking pavers or other materials sufficient to support fire and other emergency vehicles, but that support grass or other ground cover, in conjunction with the construction of the streets serving the remainder of the Project. The Emergency Accessway shall be dedicated to public use upon request by the County. 7. Pedestrian Easement. The Homeowners Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Project shall contain a provision which grants, or directs the Homeowners Association to grant, a pedestrian easement over all walkways which directly connect with property outside of the Project. Signature Page Immediately Follows 2 . . . WITNESS the following duly authorized signatures: Owner: OAKLEIGH ALBEMARLE, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company By: Printed Name: Title: 1479905v) 3 . TO: Stephen Waller, Planner FROM: Gary Whelan, Engineering Technician DATE: June 29,2005 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: Oakleiqh T own homes (TM 45, Parcel 26A) The below checked items apply to this site. SDP-200S-00062 x X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for: A. Water and sewer B. Water only C. Water only to existing structure D. Limited service 2. A..R inch water line is located approximately 350' distant. 3. Fire flow from nearest public hydrant, located 350'distant from this site plan, is 745 gpm :!: at 20 psi residual. 4. An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately 200' distant. 5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed. 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future easements. 7. and plans are currently under review. 8. and plans have been received and approved. 9. No plans are required. 10. Final water and ~ plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. 11. Final site plan may/may not be signed. 12. RWSA approval for water and/or sewer connections. X X . X X X Comments: Show offsite sewer plans and easements. The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations waterline locations sewer line locations easements waterline size sewer line size expected wastewater flows expected water demands . Attachment I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 September 27,2007 Jo Higgins 104 Ana Marie Blvd Waynesboro, VA 22980 RE: ZMA2007-00006 Three Notch'd Center (Sign # 76) Tax Map 56A3, Parcel 9 & 11 Dear Ms. Higgins: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on September 18, 2007, recommended approval of the above-noted petition by a vote of 6:0 to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. ClarifY the "Evergreen screening trees for EC Corridor" note or delete it from the plan. 2. Provide conceptual grading. 3. Provide for the additional pedestrian way central to the parking lot. 4. Revise the plan to indicate that landscaping will be provided along the east side of the shared driveway, to the satisfaction of the ARB, with a landscape easement provided by the adjacent owner. 5. Add the following note to the plan: "Landscaping shown on this conceptual plan does not meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the Quidelines, as required by the ARB, with additional planting area provided, as necessary, to acc()mmodate ARB requirements. " 6. Minor format revisions are needed by the County Attorney to the proffers and the applicant should proffer to provide the off-site landscaping on the adjoining property to the east. [Check with Greg on this please.] Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on December 12, 2007. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale Planner Planning Division "R"R /~M COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2007-006 Three Notch'd Center AGENDA DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT/PROPOSAUREQUEST: Rezone from LI Light Industrial to PDSC Planned District Shopping Center to redevelop the property into two buildings, a total of 40,460 square feet. ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACTlS): Cilimberg, Ragsdale ATTACHMENTS: YES LEGAL REVIEW: YES OWNER/APPLICANT: Jeffrey Sprouse; represented by Jo Higgins, Project Development Ltd. BACKGROUND: A public hearing was held on this rezoning at the Planning Commission on September 18,2007. The Commission recommended approval of the rezoning to the Board of Supervisors. This motion for approval was conditioned upon the following corrections to the application plan and proffers: Application Plan: Clarify the "Evergreen screening trees for EC Corridor" note on the plan. Provide conceptual grading. Provide for the additional pedestrian way in the center of the parking lot. Revise the plan to indicate that landscaping will be provided along the east side of the shared driveway to the satisfaction of the ARB, with a landscape easement provided by the adjacent owner. Add the following note to the plan: "Landscaping shown on this conceptual plan does not meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the Guidelines, as required by the ARB, with additional planting area provided, as necessary, to accommodate ARB requirements." Proffers: Minor format revisions are needed by the County Attorney to the proffers. DISCUSSION/FINDINGS: The applicant has submitted a revised application plan and proffers that address all conditions listed above in the Commission's recommendation. The applicant has also provided a letter from the adjoining property owner indicating that all easements necessary for the shared entrance into the property and for landscaping will be granted. ZMA 2007-006 Three Notch'd Center BOS 12/12/07 Public Hearing Attachment I Origina Amendbu r 'UIIC' (Amendment # PROFFER FORM Date: 12 11'/2Q07 ZMA # 2007 - 006 Tax Map Parcel(s) # 56 A(3) - 9, 11 2.32 Acres to be rezoned from 11 to PD-SC in accordance with the Application Plan prepared by NP Enqineerinq dated 1/2/07 revised 8/15/07 The development of the Property shall be limited to those uses allowed by right under Section 18-25.2.1 and those uses allowed by special use permit under Section 18-25,2.2 of the Albemarle County Code, excepting those by right uses delineated in Sections 18-22.2.1, 18-23.2.1 and 18-24.2.1 listed below, as all of those sections are in effect on December 12, 2007, copies of which are attached hereto. The following by right commercial and service establishments shall not be permitted on the Property: (1) The Permitted uses of the property, and/or uses authorized qy~p~qialuseperrT'fjt, shall be only those uses allowed by Albemarle County Code Section 18-25.2 in effect on tZI121-.40,Qfl. The by right uses permitted under Albemarle County Code Section 18-25.2.1.1, the C-1, CO, and HC uses cross- referenced therein shall include only those commercial and service establishments allowed in Albemarle County Code Section 18-22, 18-23, and 18-24 in effect on 12/t2/2007 except the following: A. Cemeteries: 18-22.2.1.b3, 18-23.2.1.4, 18-24.2.1.5 B. Fire & rescue squad stations: 18.22.2.1.b6, 18-24.2.1.13 C. Indoor theaters: 18-22.2.1.b9,18-24.2.1.38 D. Libraries, museums: 18-22.2.1.b12, 18-23.2.1.5 E. Automobile service stations 18-22.2.1.b16, 18-24.2.1.5 F. Automobile, truck repair shop, excluding body shop: 18-22.2,1.b22, 18-24.2.12 G. Hotels, motels and inns: 18-24.2.1.20 H. Mobile home and trailer sales: 18-24.2.1.23 I. Modular bldg sales: 18-24.2.1.24 J. Motor vehicle sales, service and rental: 18-24.2.1.25 K. Building material sales: 18-24.2.1.4 L. Light warehousing: 18-24.2.1.21 M. Machinery and equipment sales, service, and rental: 18-24.2.1.22 N. New automotive parts sales: 18-24.2.1.26 O. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles: 18-24.2.1.32 P. Wholesale distribution: 18-24.2.1.34 Q. Heating oil sales and distribution: 18-24.2.1.39 R. Indoor athletic facilities: 18-22.2.1.b24, 18-24.2,1.42 Jeffrey S. Sprouse (TMP 56A3-11) Printed Names of All Owners Date /p/;~) Jeffrey Sprouse (TMP 56A3-9) OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact N~I.i'amv:. i\A;'?I,'}, :r,i1~s-:'J. i,(,ni1l1'''' '7::~.i1,. <1l'li ~;~MJ~li: ~U ~ ~ - = ~ e .J: ~ ~ - - < 9N! d]}N!9N7 dN 0::: w I--- Z UJ o o ~ I o I--- o Z w w ~ I I-- /.'1/ "':"" '. '" r~.... C \ \.,' ,~.,_.J /" j ( \/ , ... .._~. .""'...._'-_..... ...... \ (A) 0") cr', L! \ .. ,.! / \ ( \ \, I ,...,.~/ / "\) ( "" I .-1 \ I. I \,.. ...,,/ ,- "". ( '\ " j 1. \ .J 1'-., ( \ \ ! 'I ) 1'...." I i \ I ~.~,..--...l.. /1/ "<',-<- " \ L.L.J C\.) ! ( \ 1._.\ ) (-\ I ' \--...----t.... ~._,~....,.,_...,~....,~._.__._.~--,-_..~_._-,_...._---,._,._._-~_._-_.~-~-,~_..,_. .__...,-,._,.__.._-~-,-,.,~._-,~---_.,._._..,~...-.....---- i ~va " 'l~II:i!tl -.l;'V" .. :J~!Ilh::.'tl I.'" "".... "" lOA'l,C ....., -__"J '- ~-""lI'" . "'-'M .. lO.'\);,1l ..... .__0 (,..",~ ~ij"" w y " " C< :) ,. iJl"- E {!;;.~ :fv/J (II G:-N i'i)~~ ~j&t:: ~~8 !il~5 '" N I;:!E~ ~:re~ .~~gj~ ~~;~, W~~~~ . f2.t:".... ~ ~~,;;:' I ~~~~~ :r. .."ur.,,\..<. t '-r'~l----~' o 0 ~ ~ ' (J ~~~>'~ 9 ~~t~ I .... -.' . ---.. ....- I~ ~ I ' ~ :. l'..{ 18 d. t~;q..b ~ ~ II ~ f'" 3 Ii -- - --- .._~ '~r]^o~ - NOll V~lIddV I9NINOZJ~ II is b ;)TY),~JVcl ''i'VB':; dVW X'l.t V!NIf.J,ji1\ ')...!NrlOc)]-idVW:Yrnv ~:;jlN:;j~ Q,H::JJ.ON :;j:;j~HJ. u (.) ::1 ::J Ii Ii f~ f! ~ i &.. 11';: 8 ~,lf ~ =c: (1 d c: t: Ii. " z u ~ iJ ffi z:: :.) :::') ld n. fl.. B ~ t,? ,";- tl. " -:( <;,- " ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 7, S i: ~'5 g ~ <( 1-...: <:( C') t:.: z -<. " .:-::1 n. ". ~~, hI ~ ~j I:, '" CJ ~ t: t~ ~ $ . [ E ~ .9. .!~ ;~ ~ l~ ::: ~.~ , ~. ~~ ... ~ ~. (11:: ~ .~ if1 g:; 0 ~ :~ :r- ffi ~ ~ :':-J 0 LLi I (/) II C: l: " 0 ',; 'c .~ .~ 171 C f<')...~ .~~ ."" ~o~-:; f ~j ~ ~ lE ~ Si ~ i}1 ;?- l~~ is t<< ~ ~ ~ :;i ~ w . a.; 1).. ~ ~ ~ ~ :1 ~ ~ 8 ~ !! ~ (;J ~ :3 (1 l:! ~ ::> 61 ill ~ I~J (Il U If) :':) '0 C1 fij v, t'J (I) (Jl 2': (,) :::) Ii; 0 '" i;j ~ ~ Ci .':t: ~ ~ ~ ~ <....1.1.; Il:.~ ~~~ ~~ ,;,)W A ~~~~ 0"Bji5 g~~ll! ~'.;Q ~ II Ii ~~ "81fi~ :i6~II~ .s.s M t! of" b ~1 'ti g" '12 o&i~C5 >.rjV.lt.Z f?~~'~ ~ (.',n~ 9~PS~ '" ,,"',..:;t~ '" ill tj u' ,... '" ~=iS~~:?-@ iY. a. l;i JY. \7} ~;t>i ~ ::,~t\i Ii! Y1 S(~~ ~ ~ oe't :l. :.0,.,.;1,/) l';'} II ~ !l vi~} r".," SO " 8 Q g ~~~.. -l ~j ,..,I V. iJ) ;"L L" v,. ....'" ~ft1~~~ u~ ':;~~~1 ,,15 " '3 '" \l lda::cifu..!:~ ff:~ ~0 ~,- C'w W ~ ;::.Iij f;j- it "- '" '" ~t: ~~ f.l "tJ X ~~~ ;:'j ~ 11 ~ Ln <:: ~ .. ,..) ~~j ~ iY. r~ 0 .. Z ~ + a. " 0 I" 0' 0.-=6.0 U iiJ l)J y. tiS I~! l:J " '" I ~~ JY. "- '" ~ ff ll.l >. '" ",.. ..J iY. !<lEJ"" ,~ " u. ~1~ ~ (,'i f" ~ ~ "':) ,J ll.'iX2 ~ OJ nOO:- '" W l.~ "" i!' ~7.l:G t~ f! z :2. ~ [E lX'.:)0 .. ~~ (:; tJ ~] z. ." ;;( :J :J !1M ~ c..~ (.g ~ i!!Jl~ '" '" I" i'! p !:lj f~ i!: '<1., ~.. Z ltJ ::2 D_ C) ~.J ltJ GJ 0 ~d E '" Z 2 ..~:) () z :2' 1..1..1 (:. '5 L1..1 15 n ~ tJ :z :d. 0 0 ,.d 0 () T Is -"..... &" '-, u.... (/)1 "" z W ~l e: u 0 Fe '" III Z 0 b 0 1,- L, I F " 0 Z Ld () 0 .., t'l ~J :2: " I". t:. v. b. h. IY () 0 0 ).< ~ <:( VI i-" o. ILl Ld C"J CI g '.".'r " (,'1 ~:~, ~ ~,~ 1 , ------I '-' I,) 10> " I '-' C; ";/ <> '" ~ " 8 '- (j i'j: :5 ~I "I ~ @ X' ::r: o 0 VI VI CI c> Z z 52 5(: ~, ~ n n. I k, I' I-.I:~ ;2j I.d !;'i o I~j -<. ,~ ;.~,' ~ ~~i "'. o z 1:: 8- l:( ;; 9 !L': ~~.. 0 Q.. ;t v, " z :;; l;.J ~ 0 0 en (0 <5 ~ bJ w ~., (C ~ ~ c;:t '-' r" z ~ Z 0 :d. ::, ~ Z (:k 0 2 75 !t~ ;;t '-' n. ::> ('3 ':1 ,,, "" 1.\'": ,-- I': Cl n: (5' U (,. '" ~:; z ~ '" :j1 '" Z " c.. ::r: ~Z z l8 .~ 1,) lei (3 j u J. i~ IX\ '" '" 0: n. -a: I;: 5' ( f'\ ,-.J CY LLi LLI o fn U) 1\) -.:i (lj L.l.~. ;;> J; ,) ~:; cO (~ n__ 0 ;; ~~ -<~ ~~ \.) ~ f.j l:! ~ ~ ~ (I) rt:: Ili (5 il: m ~ ~ '" V' -< o ;r(,l";,'~M'V', ;a7.l Vii Tl"1v,:!l':ti. ;t.\'"iii\'lf::' ';';~lJ. <:h'lJ :'i!Q1!l~ ""II 9/V! d77/V/9/'{7 (IN r-..._.NN_.N_.___.___.____________"__.,__,~"_oH..~_U"__..._.___N,.N,._..__._'~__...__. L '""""""':- ."''''':.::."'''' v~.:"'" "00>>" J I I II i? ~; STJ-:')?'J\fc1 'OZ' V '?jC, dVW xv L I VINI'D,jj^ 'I, 1 N(I[lc) .P(JVW:led IV I ~'J1N'Ja a,HalON 'J'J~Hl _. N __ . _. ~_. _N" _. _. _ _ u -- -- ~NOI!AA1tl .V/Iol/~ ~;a:jIW ~ '-:J lIo--...w ~tl , , " ". ", , , , '. .*,\ '--" , ..",._...........rIlIIIL..,.....;oj, .~ i,. "_IIIU1D111l11ll11J; / "'--..:, (," (~: '" . (;'l:~ t" ....J ~;~s ;:c) l,(' -.J '" .)) I ~J l~: ~ ;;; lf~ ~lj ~ ~ ~t3 ;~: ~ Cl' )"!j \~J ~E ~\ ...~( .~J "':{ it: / , / , .,.'....'>. ;~...;". w<l"/;';/y!( j///' /.~: \. .~t ,/ 1/ I. /:'~, // /~~\/.}:, . ':' i . //f / .... ..../'-.j /,1':\\ I / / /.{ "-:.-'''.. '(j i /\ I ! ' ';( 1'1 r / ../. /. >. '1>, .' j J / / 'I () '-7(,,,,"" I. / I . / ~rf ,I / (I I: / /?iiY; r/ ;' / ; / J I' /: / / ,I / , //).- I ' , ! 1" I / / " II 'i /0' If il/;"/, II'V' //,.: I. I f/J / ,I . i " ! I' I: / //.' i .II i r 'I!! r I ~ . i / ., i "1 . l/ , I I ,'l 'I. I . / '// :;.; /{' j I ! i i / !l'lljl.jt! I", ~~ ;' J,f / ' ! I ! i i / I! 111 ' , / I 1;, ! ~~ ..x, ;r :i.I. I / I ;' ! ' . II I.'i, I '/' f (' .~j. . ~0 / i~ 11..11 l I! .;! r/ ' ,'I .!l1 ! i \ \ r' . 1>1>/ ' HI', '. / ( / / / I ' ~I I, I 1/ { , 'i I>~ '~'I!' ,I ("II : I I (,\ \ I"~ C? ;';' It I / I /' I ,*" r.t i 1,/ j \ \ / " I\il, / ; Ii! ,7,(c,' t..;:1 r \ I: \ / , .....,i.ll. / ! !! I ~i'I\!\! I I" " 1/ ;' ;1..1', 'l / ;':~'.fi:;1 LII! II I' / ,i ! 1'1 (I, / I IUJf.',f,I /t! , ! '" I " i,' r I, Q" j '~f ':' 1111 ' wi lif 'I I }! I .0: :"'I'."j j I! I' ) il(",~ !! ' .'itA co .': 'I' fil' '11eJ\ \, l2.'/1 ~ (I \ I I l \\ i"\~'I\ '1, r= I1I1 \ i I \ \ \ '.1)~\ ,x \ \! I, II \ " \ \ \ 1'/\ " X \ \ A \ 1....'1.' i \' \I\.U//,,~f/)) \ ,.... " \ \ \ \ ~Mk>..' <J,u //' / / i \ \ \ \ \ I~'l~ /// /1lif. , II \. ' \ III /1'1..1It' !l~r. / ./ \ \ ' \ 'f U"! l' / \ ' \ \ \!i 'iN I ,', / ! \ \ "\ \:; ,. Vi, I ! / '\ \" f / I . ' 1:1 I ;'i',., {, / ,.,1,' ',.j :"ff~.1\,'\: . j / '.'il: A'l "i.,,' ". .../., .... ;.,~ "- I . ,/ t1!\ I, :;t;;fl: (ty: \,\ ;. '~'Y'~fJ? " ,..;, ~' ' ...../ .-+-.. I / \ \ CJ ., o cr, // \ // \ / /".~~./\ / / , I ~! ! I, / !I .~,.... -.. '. ,.,,1,.,. I ~.-/' ~~'F~ ;~J 1"1 . 1 f(l ',J',l / ~~ '< 0) l[~~ ~~ 'i. I IS~ i~; ~, ", I' ~. ~~(l :~) ~1 ~: l'J ~i, !'l.l :-c::::^ (~) i~.~ (f i~,iIl;S ! t': Q~(t .:!S (~~ ~ I / "'-f~/ .../ I ,)<',,, I --::;>--c'-,,~.j.j'P' , " \. '" I ,. In ~, , , , . , \. ' ',- iJl \,-- ~,J o C( , / \l 11 , I I . / l In co 0") \ \ LU j-.... 4: .."....~ I i I I / j-'" U) / ,i / / / ..:~ \l~ ,'!it . " In / // :::J :::'.~~::lO .. / '~'''./ / / "hi.';f) ""- , \ / ~::) \ , " .. \ \ , // , '-" J I I i i}f I R~ Q *P! _..,~..--t':::~: .~2' , , '" i,,-,, '- ,'\ \ \l',l , ,\\ I. t \~ -: l~r-''''''- ~ ~ ,I~. I pp~ h I~M" ~.. ",--- ~-- -l~ a ~' (\ i~~q 8. I~ ~il~~~~ .Ji.. ~; r ~" "l'i, ~~" ,; '4'~ ~~.- C) 0 '0 ell . C) '" UJ ,J ." " '" H '" X '" c.. .f '" l:J ~. 0-:- / /; I I I ~/; I / ' . / II I /;-1/ I II II / f I I I I : II I I; /; r/I///I/ / fllll~ ~ r/ t / ! / I I I I II II I ii ! 1': I I / / I I I I rl (i j IlllI/ 1111tJ( ~J!/ I I I I I I~' i!!,I/ I I I I r-- '11.'1'1. I I I / l'1 I", I <Xl ~ i!'II! I I r J I ~ I!III \ , I I \ ~N L ~ I!,I \ I I \ \ \ \ ~ ~ !'I \ \ \ \ \ \ / ~~~ illj! \ \ \ \ \ /' r ~ ~ 'il \ \ \ \ - ~ltiCs) ) 1\ \ \ =- ----. ~~ - - - -------,. \ ---- ~___ - - ___ I \ \ \ =: '---~t- :::::650- ~ '-../ J '--- ~ l( ----. '--- ~ '--- ~~ - _ ----. '-.." , J /" ~ -650-'--....", \ '---/ I"j '--- %~ - - ~ '--- I h;:~I, _ _ \ \ '--- ( V)~(i;j \, \ '- __ "l.( \ \ \../'"../' - --__~_ I " ~ )) \ ~ ../' , " " - - -.I..- " '" ../' ) '---, '" '" ../' /' >../' > . ~ " ../'../' /'../'../'../'../'../'../' ----- /1' { ~. ",,--../' ../' ../'../'../' ../' ~ .---I 'IT \ y;; '-../'../'../';:~../' ~o ~ (-- -- I I I "Z~~ ~ ../'?~O~F ~~~ I /. / -- --- -1\(' ~'ti;>.l '-.." "-'-..~=~-:::;;r-- I ~~~ ()) -- -t -- 'ff~ ~ '" - / 1 ~ ~~ ~ --. \ '" I __\--1~\C~\ 1;; \ '" .J.\ ltil.i..J~W"li iU \ ~:N;<::'5 \ \ \ \ h;:~~~~\ \ ~-/ \ 1fj~~t::l..--. __ ~F /' / ~ -....J ~ --?../'../' / \-- ~/~ ../'../' ../'.../' --:-- // U~ IllCD VA :lT1lo\S'11.!O"1WH:) "nIdMN....,.... 018 9N/C/'J'JN/9N'J dN ~ '" '" '" '" '" "'.. .. """".. .... ".. .. .'0"'''''' .... "'''''' ~ ':O/.........,~'-:) ~ . "'''''' ~ .........-~~- , NV'd ,vn.Ld']ON<X> - NOll. vondclv 'ON/NOZ,]~ II ~ (;' Si",]:)(jVd ''Z:V9S dVW XV.L VINI'9~I^ 'A1NnO:J Tl~VVCl'tl,V ~j'JJ.N:;I~ Q.H~J.ON :;IJ~HJ. - *;, f:f 00' _00 81~ &.ft ~"o i~~ ~ .;'ia :za oeg Q~ ,3~ 1-0 :8>; ~!f !:'O ~~ ~8~ o~ 6g~ lo.Io( ~'g 0) ~~ ~ ~ ~ <II i? ~1 ii~ ~a o. ;~~ ...~t fl! -g~~ ,,~o ~iJ ~~... .8 i E' iii r'l:l >- ~H_ ~i i~ -J~ \ \ \ \ I o .~ c . 0 '=OCl llEL ~~ ri ~;5i <( ~a...~ ... La 0" Ocs::O 0001.. : -:i~ s::ia<( :a:S~ .a s i 3 &:dt ~ ~~~ ~ g &'1 g 't.s'" Q ~!:t :~g : ~ a ~o ~-gf~ i t~ ~ .E-8of1f ",f~~ 2'.8H Bid !s- o . iI~ -J 9.: ~~'-.i \...jI::C"l: " -....Ji,,~ ~N~()) ~~'" 1.....5:: . \(l1:5~~ lti~~ . ~~;<::~ " ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ "l: CQ ~ ./ s s '" II ~~ ~~~ iA ':' ... i Ii 0 a a a ~ I" NJ Ii Ii ~ i ~ ' Ii liil il i ~ I 2! i (, 0 '" m .' 0 '" 0 '" COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA 2007-006 Three Notch'd Staff: Rebecca Ragsdale Center Critical Slopes Waiver & Waiver of 20 Foot Buffer Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: September 18, 2007 December 12, 2007 Owners: Jeffrey Sprouse Applicant: Jo Higgins, Project Development Ltd. Acreage: approx. 2.3 acres Rezone from: LI Light Industrial TMP: TMP 56A3-9 and 56A3-11 By-right use: Industrial, office, and limited commercial uses (no residential use) Magisterial District: White Hall Proffers: Yes Proposal: Rezone to PDSC Planned District Requested # of Dwelling Units: None Shopping Center to redevelop the property into two buildings, a total of 40,460 square feet. DA (Development Area): Community of Crozet Compo Plan Designation: CT 5 Urban Center in the Crozet Master Plan Character of Property: Currently developed Use of Surrounding Properties: Music Today, self with a 11/2 story frame house as a restaurant and storage, and undeveloped a two-story cinder block building with service/office uses Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The rezoning is consistent with the Crozet 1. A conceptual grading plan has not yet been Master Plan recommendations. provided but the applicant is working to res-pond to this request. 2. The applicant has provided an application 2. Minor revisions and notes are needed to proffers plan that meets Neighborhood Model and the application plan. design expectations. However, the applicant has indicated they intend to provide revised proffers and an application plan to address these outstanding issues listed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff can recommend approval only after conceptual grading is provided that satisfactorily addresses Entrance Corridor and critical slopes considerations and minor revisions to the application plan and proffers are made. WAIVER OF SECTION 21.7.3-20 FOOT BUFFER ZONE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL/RURAL DISTRICTS Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval of the waiver of Section 21.7.3 to allow construction activity including, grading or clearing of vegetation closer than twenty (20) feet to the adjoining Rural Area zoned property line to the east, in accordance with the concept plan provided as Attachment H. Provided that: 1. A landscape easement is obtained by the adjoining property owner and landscaping is provided to the satisfaction of the ARB on the adjoining property to the east. ATTACHMENTS A. Location Map-Aerial B. Zoning Map C. Traffic Impact Analysis D. VDOT comments E. Albemarle County Service Authority comments via e-mail from Gary Whelan F. Entrance Corridor comments provided by Margaret Maliszewski, dated August 29, 2007 G. Proffers H. Application Plan titled Three Notch'd Center, dated August 15, 2007, and prepared by NP Engineering I. Crozet Master Plan Place Type & Built Infrastructure Map -,~ 11 ~l ~l N 3: :t:- o ~ I o en -t ~ ~ CD Z o - n ~ ci. (') CD :::J - CD .., :i> CD ~. l>> f i Oil I I 0 I I 10 If [ I Ii! [ J j f: f f ,iii ~f . g ~ j ~ t !f I > - - ~ t') =- a ~ = - i' -i~ ~"~Cl i'~C{i ba~Et~ CDQl(JJfT f:l,H ~ > = .. = .. .. .. < l ! I . ! f f I J I ! I 1 J J ..rn a III ,! I J I I I I I ! i J i I J I Iff III .. ... .... I oS; l i f f s I ~ ! I f I 1 ~J i J J J J I j ~ II OJ I I 0 I II iO il 15:~ iJ!!i~ ~~j~ a:.ciii ~~~ J I . l - \.\, li1 ] \ N PI I M c( lR lIlI " \0 I lR I--\ 1--1 l \ ( . ) s... CI) - c CI) o J:J .c (,) - o Z CI) CI) s... .c .... CD Q I " Q <( :e N " \0 ~ ,{ ';.. , I .' M .. c(/ . ~/\ '\. .//...... V tf,:I\ \ GiIL..- ~ I. M\ V // (~~") ( \\ '" J \"'''''"""""",-:". \.----- c '\ \ \ \ \.../.\ ~ ----~- \ '-\..//-- C PI I M c( lR ---1 z 4i Q) LL ,-,- >.;::;;~/ . (-y I ~ I \; I \ lR ! /t~. I )'/ -.'\ '\ o . " E> ~ 5 OJ i ~ ~ 0 OJ 0 0 OJ i .. ~ ~ >- c( lIlI ~ " " " ~ \0 \0 \0 I I I ~ I I I PI PI PI >- 0 0 0 . a. I I I ~ N N N .2 ~ c( c( ~ lR 0. . " Attachment C 0.. Draper Aden Associates ~ Eogineerlng + Surveying + Environmental Services 8090 Villa Park Drive Richmond, Virginia 23228 (804) 264-2228 . Fax: (804) 264-8773 dua@daa.coll1 . www.daa.com June 1,2007 Ms. Jo Higgins Project Development Ltd. LC, 104 Ana Marie Blvd., Waynesboro, VA 22980 Re: Three Notch'd Center Transportation Analysis Plan Dear Ms. Higgins: Attached please find traffic infornlation requested regarding the proposed Three Notch'd Center development. The information included responds to the specific Albermarle County Code: 25.6 Additional Requirements. Specific information provided includes: 1. Projected Automobile Traffic - Attached Tablel includes full site vehicle trip generation, based on ITE Trip Generation Codes. We estimate that truck traffic should be no more than 5% of this total. 2. Estimated traffic distribution - See Figure 1. 3. Access point turning movements - see Figure 1. 4. Proposed movements - An additional westbound Route 240 lane along the site parcel will be developed. A single entrance will be provided, although a future shared entrance at the eastern parcel edge (see Figure 1) could be accommodated. Please feel free to call us should you have any further questions. Sincerely, DRAPER ADEN ASSOCIATES It:.~ ~ Thomas E. Flynn, P .E., PTOE, Transportation Program Manager Attachments Blacksburg. Charlottesville, Hampton Roads. Richmond. VA C:\DocumcnlS and ScltingslashamllllLocaI SettingslTcmporaryJnlenlet Files\OLKJILTR - 07 0601 - HIGGINS - Three Notch'd Center - TEF.doc . PROPOSED ROADWAY GEOMETRies STOP'1: tf' .".. ~ L ~E- SITE ~ State Rte 240 LEGEND ~ Existing Lane Usage ---:;.. Proposed Lane Usage . . DflIJlCr Adem Ali50clalCS .~=-.~ . .......... ~ ~ SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION (% Total Traffic) Site 70% Rte 240 (West) 30% Rte 240 (East) SITE TRAFFIC AT FULL DEVELOPMENT ~~ 6)6 l.Q.(2. r-.. ~ Jl 89 (67)1999 I.-J tL.- 38 (29)1428 I LEGEND XX (XX) I XXXI AM peak (PM peak) Daily Trips THREE NOTCH'D CENTER Traffic Data N t : Future : Shared . Driveway FIGURE 1 lII:: ~I v I() ~ C\l m col ~ I"- ~I~ co Ol M Ol 0:( -"i w CL ~I :E v co C\l C\lCO COI~ C\l 101"- C\l CO " CL M M Ol lII:: ~ ~I 0 m Ol C\l V C\l M M M 0:( I() M V I() I() I() CO I"- CO W CL wI ~ ~ ffi a:1 0 ~ ~ CO CO CO l"- I"- l"- I() m I() V V V C\l lII:: ~I m 13v CO C\l1C\j ~IC;; 0 C? Ol M ~"'I' m CO 0:( ..... ..... W CL CL wI :E C\l I() CO m C\l m -I- C\l m ~ V C'".i I"- ~ I'-: ~ CL a: 0:( ..t 0 c.O I-a: C\l ~ M lII:: ~I V 0 C\l 0 CO MI~ (')1"'1' ..... C\l V CO 0:( W ~I CL :E C\l M ~ CO C\ll 8l CO C\jIC l"- I() m N 0:( C\l CO .....C\j ..... ~ ~I CO CO 0 m . CO C\l ~ C\l lII:: 0 0:( V V V M I() I() C\l W CL ~ ~I z :E b 0 V C\l 0 ~ V CO m CO fi 0:( o Z I() I() CO CO I() V CO I"- CO W ..... a: III W ~I 2S z lII:: 0 ~ I() C\l I()I~ m ~I~ 0 CO 0 0 III W 0:( ..... N l- e" W CL CL a: :E CL wI C\l ?"- M . ~ I() CO I() I- 0:( -I- CO Ll'! CO C! 0 l"- Ll'! V Ll'! a: 0:( ..t ~ C'".i N N I-a: ~ V il~1 V CO CO ..... 101..... V ~ M C\l I()IC CO C\l It) M I() l"- V I"- 1"-10 CO .....co I"- CO ~ V C\j C\jC\j N > CL WI I() V C\l ~ M ~ ..I-I- V CO m b M C! ~ C! -a: 0:( c.O r-.: r:::. N ..t ~ c.O ~ ~I-a: CO C\l V CO V ~ M ~ ~ U"l 0 0 0 0 0 C\l C\l I() C\l 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO C\l 0 CO V 0 C\l ?"- m m I() C\l M C\l ..- ..- I() I() CO ai ~lgl :0 0 C\l M 0 CO V 0 0 0 .!!1 ?"- M M C\l m 0; r:::. C\l r:::. "Cij -0 CO m m CO CO I"- > III c: ::J III >: <l> 1il 'S c ~ -0 0 0 Iii Q) - Q ::J ~ 15 (ij '0 0)- .l!! c:( .!: 1ij c. <l> .~ '- E 0 ~ <Ii .!!! .r: .... ~ Q) Q) _ ::J III E ~ 0 III Q) Q Q) Q) ~ <3 iii t3 <Jl 'Cij <.l <.l E ~ Q) 45 ~ ~ ~ :E (5 -0 W -- .... Q) ~ --J 0 --J Q) !2 c: c: ~ !2 ~ en c.c: .2 III Q) ~ Cf) 1il ::::l <l> o := Q) .... Iii l2 <l> Iii Iii l2 ...J E c E .r: 0 III <3 0 Qj E Qj <.l <l> c:( z ECf)O N ~~ c: ~ E c: '5 ~ c: I- ~ c( 0;:: N Q) 0 Q) Q) <l> Q w ..I C,,)C} en a:: 0> C} C/) C,,)C}~ C/) e" I- Attachment D . Rebecca Ragsdale From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [JoeI.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 1:47 PM To: Jo Higgins Subject: RE: Three Notch'd Center - comments Mrs. Higgins, We have received the traffic numbers requested and reviewed the site. A left turn lane is not necessary with the rezoning. The layout you have provided is adequate and the details and other comments we provided on the rezoning request can be handled with the site plan. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 . joel. den u nzio@VirginiaDOT.org From: Musxit@aol.com [mailto:Musxit@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 1 :21 PM To: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. Subject: Three Notch'd Center - comments Joel - I sent an email on June 26th regarding the comments from VDOT. After that Charles left me a voice message and I talked to Charles today. Per our earlier meeting and considering the existing conditions, the project design is to include a lane across the full frontage which is the West bound side. I ask that you email me back so I may provide confirmation to the County that the comment regarding the left turn lane has been withdrawn. Your assistance is appreciated. Jo 1f'1fJ8ins CFroject (])evefopment Limitetf LC 104.ft.na !Marie (]J(va Waynes60r0, Va. 22980 new office plione 434 - 326 - 0334 new faJ( num6er 434 - 326 - 0340 Ce{( (434) 242 - 3080 emau'musxit@aol.com" . 9/11/2007 Three Notchd Center ZMA 2007-00006 Attachment E Rebecca Ragsdale From: Gary Whelan [gwhelan@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11: 13 AM To: Rebecca Ragsdale Subject: RE: Three Notchd Center ZMA 2007-00006 Rebecca, There is adequate water supply and at a projected waste water flow of 3,645 gallons per day, the project doesn't need capacity certification from RWSA. To be on the safe side the applicant should have projected sewer flows calculated so as not to exceed the 40,000 gpd limit for certification requirement. -Gary From: Rebecca Ragsdale [mailto:rragsdale@albemarle.org] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 4:59 PM To: Gary Whelan Subject: RE: Three Notchd Center ZMA 2007-00006 Gary- Are there any comments that you can provide us on the water and sewer capacity to serve the project? Thanks! -Rebecca Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (434) 296-5832 Ext. 3439 Fax (434) 972-4012 E-mail: mlgsdllk@i:l.lb.emarJ~~QIg From: Gary Whelan [mailto:gwhelan@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Friday, July 06, 20073:34 PM To: Rebecca Ragsdale Subject: Three Notchd Center ZMA 2007-00006 Rebecca, Comments were made back in May but never typed and sent. The following items apply to this site. 1. This project is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for water and sewer. 2. A 6" water line is located approximately 50' distant. 3. An 8" sewer line is located on site. 4. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future easements. Q/11/?007 . . . Three Notchd Center ZMA 2007-00006 5. Final water plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. 6. RWSA approval required for water connections. 7. Backflow prevention is required. 8. Provide plumbing fixture count to size meter. 9. Show service connections and meter location. Page 2 0[2 We usually don't have much to say during the ZMA stage. These comments are mainly for final site plan review. Call if you have any questions. -Gary G, M. Whelan, LS Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charloffesvme, VA 22911 (434) 977-4511 Fax: (434) 979-0698 9/11/2007 Attachment F COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 Mcintire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434)972-4126 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Rebecca Ragsdale Margaret Maliszewski ZMA-2007-06: Three Notch'd Center August 29, 2007 I have reviewed the plan with revision date of 8/15/07. I have added updated comments following my previous comments from May. Updated comments are in italics, and updated recommendations are provided at the end of the memo. Please note that this submittal consisted of Sheet 1 of 3 and Sheet 3 of 3; there was no Sheet 2. 1. Materials: "Rural area materials" were recommended, for example, a stone water table with siding above. A big stucco building isn't recommended. 2. Surrounding context: Picking up on the language of the nearby industrial buildings was recommended. a. The applicant is waiting to address this at site plan review. 3. Scale: It was recommended that the building use a porch to break down the scale so that it doesn't read as two stories and coordinates well with the surroundings. a. Some revisions have been made to the buildingfootprints to help eliminate the "boxy" appearance. Additional architectural treatments may be required by the ARB. 4. Form: Use of an interesting roofline - not just a box - was recommended. a. The applicant is waiting to address this at site plan review. 5. Parking area trees: Planting islands are needed in the parking areas, particularly where direct views are available from the EC into the parking area. a. No change has been made to the plan, although the applicant has indicated that landscaping will be increased from the EC perspective and in parking islands. A row of parking spaces at the east end of the property has been removed; however, standard landscaping is not shown along the eastern shared driveway. 6. Pedestrian spaces: Engaging the landscape with a cafe and/or terraces was recommended. Creating a gathering space was recommended. a. The sidewalks have been revised and a plaza is suggested between the two buildings. Additional landscaping may be required by the ARB. 7. While some elements of the Comer Store on Route 29 South might be appropriately incorporated into the design of the buildings at Three Notch'd Center, the scale of the Comer Store may not . . . translate well to the Route 240 site. Appropriate scale was an issue identified by the ARB. a. The applicant is waiting to address this at site plan review. 8. The application plan does not show EC trees at the proper spacing. It does not show perimeter trees on the east and west sides of the site. These are typically required at the site plan review stage. The joint access at the east end of the site may require special landscape treatment. Additional planting will likely be required elsewhere on site, as well. a. This comment has not been addressed. The planting strip between the sidewalk and the road scales at less than 5 '. This is not sufficient planting area. The area between the sidewalks that run parallel to the EC will be required for EC planting,' consequently, this area must remain clear of utilities and easements. Some parking has been removed from the east end of the site and the shared driveway has been revised. No planting is shown along the shared driveway. The ARB Guidelines have not been met in this regard. There is ajloating "Evergreen screening trees for EC Corridor" note. 9. On Sheet 3, the grading shown in black does not tie into the grading shown in gray, even though both appear to be existing grading. Render existing grading consistently. Show grading that ties together. a. Existing grading has been revised and coordinated, but no proposed grading is shown. Grading required to accommodate the proposed development could result in unanticipated visual impacts. Such impacts could require revisions to the layout of the development. 10. Landscaping is rendered as "proposed" on the subject parcel and the adjacent parcel, although the adjacent parcel is not included in this application. Render landscaping proposed for the subject parcel differently than other landscaping. a, The applicant has indicated that the adjacent parcel is shown for coordination purposes and all site features shown there are existing. Showing the adjacent site elements for coordination purposes is desirable. Nevertheless, distinguishing between existing and proposed features makes for a more legible plan. Based on the revised submittal, I recommend the following: 1. Submit Sheet 2 of 3 for review. 2. Submit proposed conceptual grading for review. 3. Clarify the "Evergreen screening trees for EC Corridor" note or delete it from the plan. 4. Revise the plan to indicate that landscaping will be provided along the east side of the shared driveway, to the satisfaction of the ARB, with a landscape easement provided by the adjacent owner. 5. Add the following note to the plan: "Landscaping shown on this conceptual plan does not meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the Guidelines, as required by the ARB, with additional planting area provided, as necessary, to accommodate ARB requirements." Attachment G Original Proffer Amended Proffer (Amendment # ) PROFFER FORM Date: 08/08/2007 ZMA # 2007 - 006 Tax Map Parcel(s) # 56 A(3) - 9. 11 2.32 Acres to be rezoned from bL to PD-SC Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. (1) The following list of uses, A - R, is excluded from the allowable uses. A. Cemeteries 18.22.2.1.b3, 23.2.1.4, 24.2.1.5 B. Fire & rescue squad station 18.22.2.1.b6, 24.2.1.13 C. Indoor theaters 24.2.1.38 D. Libraries, museums 18.22.2.1.b12, 23.2.2.5 E. Automobile service stations 18.22.2.1.b16, 23.2.1.5 F. Automobile, truck repair shop, excluding body shop 23.2.1.b22, 24.2.1.2 G. Hotels, motels and inns 24.2.1.20 H. Mobile home and trailer sales 24.2.1.24 I. Modular bldg sales 24.2.1.24 J. Motor vehicle sales, service and rental 24.2.1.25 K. Building material sales L. Light warehousing M. Machinery and equipment sales, service, and rental N. New Automotive parts sales O. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles P. Wholesale distribution a. Heating oil sales and distribution R. Indoor athletic facilities Signatures of All Owners Jefferv S. Sprouse Printed Names of All Owners Date OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact PROFFORMWPD Rev.December 1994 J: - c Q) E .c CJ ~ <( '9N/~'J'JN/'9N'J dN "... .- ......'" .,. "... .. ......'" .,. .."'" .. .to..."....., ~ '-:)..-.., , ~ IOtnVA'JT"M5~~lI'U.f'N'8~o.- ~'1^O~ - NOll. 'v'~ndd'v' ~NINOZ:il~ II ~ b 51-::J:J~V'd ''2:V'9<; dV'W XV'1. VINI'9?:1I^ ')d.Nno~ Tl?:lVVCI'tl,V ~'1l.N:iI~ Q.H~l.ON :iI:iI~Hl. ~ ~ l!! ~ l!! ~ l!! I g J; a a a ~ ':!O . . ~ i 5 h;!li 8 ~ = . ~ ~q i ... ~ 1; i l6 ~ .., l:l'::' ~~ Iil "' ~ ~ I llilll ~~51 . ~ !i ;a: I~ ::!~~ G ~~~ ~ III ~ Iil + ~ ~ I "i8l!iS! U I ~ IlIIl1Il1 ~ i: ~ :2 OJ: "0 ~ tititi t1 · U ~ t1 - 0 8 .tt~ ~ :. ~lll ; i i ~ ~ ~ a: i ~ OL If) ~ ~ I ~ . o(\J . ;a: . '51 ... ~ · ""' Q .v uJ ~(\J I I i ; i .5151 ~ - i ci ,.; oil 51 ~ I Q CL. '" ., ....~ !Ii.. ... Ill::! ~ ~ ! c 0 ",_l:I .;;~ ~ .5.5~1i 2~~~. ee~ uJ L - " os ~ Ii: ~~"j i ., ~ '" 'l5~ 8 Q t1 ~ '" :2 1-01 ~ ~N~~ OJ: OJ: '" ~ ~ ::;m~ ~ c ~ ~ It It It:flll ll! l:l .. j!: L ~ "'.... Hi I 2 ~ CL.- I~~ ~ p~ I ! ~ 8 fflll' ~K~~~ ii~ a: Ol: - 0> cO ~~~ij ~~ i ~~I~ ~~~~~~ h~ i i G ~o(\J G.ili~ ~I~~a ..:: l:l l:l :2 1Il==~ "'Ii: ui~:r: I I :J :J C > I l;;~ti j j I ; II 11: g ~ Iil oil tl "' lu 311lr-/) ~~117 ~ 3: ~ ~ ~i i ~U~~ ~~n~; ~;~ ~ ~ uJ cO(\J ..,.., ~"'N ~ ~ 9 - ~ ~ Ji::3cO - I '" '" l!/~~ z_ ~ :8:8 iil G. ~ ~ ~ ~ j!: j!: ~- Q.OL'If or-/) <{ :2 ~..c'lf _0_ <( 2 ~ d i I ~ ~ ~ ~ i e 0 I 2 ::> ~ I ~ t1 .. Iil El ~ ~ us l:l ~ - ~ "' .... ~ is III ~ :I: :I: ~ = \2J w Ii: .. ~ I OJ: ~ ~ ~ lil lil I- ffi t:l ~ ~ g ~ ~ I !i ~ OJ: ~ ~ Iii f Q ;;: ~ i ~ - 1JJ (j) ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ U - 0) > '" U) Z >- -J 0 r'---- - r- LLJ 0 ~c.o 2 0 <Co 0 N Uo ~ U ..-J1 0 [Lr'---- CL <{ L() <(. [La 28 0 -- 0 <Co ~ U ~~ LJ ~ C)N zW (f) _...J '" Z<c Ut3 I'f) _CIl -J =:) > <{ (9 Z:2 U =:) ON <{ cD <C N L() w 2 Ct: LLJ U cO 2 -J r- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <{ t- Z W ~ a. 0 -l W (;j Cl (j) ~ en Z I- ~ ~ ::> W ~ W '" lL ~ t:; ~ :;;i 0 I ~ ~ ~ u (j) ~ z OJ: z 0 0 ~ ~ Ii! ~ ~ ~ LL u l5 u t- o Ii< z ~ ~ 0 ~I ~ .., ~ W en ~ '" ~ t:; ... ... ... t- ~ w 0::: ~ X LrJ 0 0 0 <( III ... Di .... N .., a. ~ w 0 W w CIl ~ Cl 1:i ~ 0 0 ~ z " OJ: i C) I" ..- N Z U ~ ::> Z Z Ii: 0 Z en I I 0 ... ~ u i u u U N 0 ~ u ~ ~ ~ E '" " ~ :!l: '" w z 0 Z 9 z ~ :J: '" ~ ~ U 0:: III ~ Ii: :;;i :5' L ~ ..... = Cl.l 6 .:l ~ .s ..... < "'-{ .. ~ .; ; -~- .J.. o o o I ao: ao: o 0 CO 0 :I: ii: C) ell: W 0 Z v-- ~~ "-~ ~ '~) @ <~l '-, \. ... "" .. 'Z 3 e z ~ o o 1\ I I ", 'Z ~- f- I ~\ <. If ~ i I i-. I II \ -\ \ j \,- ~ i \ ! . ( \\ /)....(".,_f ! i / ' , , "- " / # r:: E '" .. . ;5:8 s] g " .. ; ~ ~ 8_V)u..s~..s 'iii.-s;;:~~'Oot E.5 t3 ::d- ;::"'C-f ~ ~ (j'- 0 'c; f ....~..sUc:ce~13.; g. ~ .~ ~ .9 C t:: ~ ~ ~..J:: .......... <U cc: .... OJ Uo u-d'...c'~ 5-5 "' 5 \ .~c=t~~-~::J \ e-::::~o';:c..VJccg _--.': ~ f:: ~ '+-0 =' e ~.,,""O =' ~ ::3 ~ .......- E QJ QJ c3 ~~ :.;~ ~ '"g~ ..!!.; c:,-:.s::--E EO ~ c'- c.-s :::.5'- ~ 5 '" 1::'.:2'~ e "tJ ~ :l \ IUCO~ c..QJCG~ , '::9:;'~ 511 o.!: 0:: 0:: ; < 5--0 o~"ii ,fS~ >- , ~g.:'"a'-~S~~ - ~ 1 .~ '; ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~~~ 5 ~..s ~ 6~ 5-0 ~~ c: E ....;.:..c:: IV a;; ~ OJ g.~~~..s ""0 ..... ';:j e - OJ'- ~~ ~ ~ 5 -a. ~:E ~ S .=: \ g.l5~ 0."1:) ~~8 ~ ""o'+".... ~~ cc OJ QJ i:= ::2 ~~:: ~ s:-E ~ ~_ 6b8~~ ~~.s 'a ;~QJ""OEt~18 ~tco::o~Q'~ . ....cc-('\'j.;::o t,:3 ~ ~~ e~~ e ~ 5 '\ ~",1.l1!~0::0::55 ~~euE...s~~~ \ ~"" U .n 5 l'l.. .- IS '5 ~ :I...... Q.. 0 ~ "E l:: c:r o ~ 0 C'C U.::: 0 QJ ~ ---'u~i:'e~~",,5u ......_ l)Q QJ OJ C..!!':+:: . ~ .S g.5 ~~ 'c 8: 'u ~ .:e e ~ ~ P..~ ; ~ -J ,- '\"" .:. o . ~ " ,/ \. . \ \ . \ "-,, . , , -. .' i / .. . ~--:.-,/,' ..... \ \ \l \ ,----_._-----~ \ \ v \ , v * I .~ _.,1 . '. f- .~~ ~/. .....-: "...." J' /j I /';< '/l~' ,/ '/ " ) . 'E I H- ,- . ~ ~i~ ! ~i~ ~H '" i~,g c E =} 'ii d ,ll ;;!. =i Q. ~ '" ! 'O~J! 8 Q; ~d ~ :! 'ii!~ i .!! i ~ ,;U U5 ~ i ". . ?: ~U j ~ a: 0 UJ ::; f ~ ~ 11 .!!! ;; W ~ ~.n E 'E '>c 'C ~ ;5 ~ ~ UJ a. << EiH. a. a. 1I1I1 I . I ~ >- . ~ a: ~ ..<< Z !UJ '" ~~ 0 z.... CD OZ << n ~ .... z fil~ w !/lo ~ a." fio ~ a. If l!l ~ ~ ~ CI) ;.. = ~ U = ;.. ~ 00 Q ~ ~ ;.. -..... ~~ ;.. ~ CI) - ~ ....-1 00 = ~~ ~~ Q ~ CI) ~ ~ \ CI) U ~ - ~ c ce ...- 0... -.:t o o N ... ::l o \ ""0 ...- .;; ~ ... Q) S Q) () Q) o '"0 2 g. '"0 <: ;... ce Q) >.- o N N ;:- .... ~ !.!. w ~ > a: a: w w ::l t; .- "' in w a: wO: .... a: a. a:.... iD ~ !.!. ., << ~ ",!Il .... ~ ....0 !.!. a: ~ ~ a: "''' << w '" .... .... "z a: .... w UJ z z .. ;i'" 0 z ffi 8 w '" -" '" " 0 !<>- 0 0 " & 0: z w ~ "'S z z ! Ii; ~~ < i ;a ~ ~ CD a a: '" '" a: a: '" '" '" '" 0 0 I ~ 11[11 I ~ \ \ "" -..:, "- ::t. ~ ~ u'~ .. '-', ~ ,~ ~ ~ -,,~ "".,.. ",. .- :;. z. to- .- ... <. ... . < z. o. MO ..l ... z' z" < . ;lo M..l -I.~-.,;;,' . ~~')l b 1\--' . . '"" .~." , . II II ..... .. """,.". ... ..... .. _>OJ ... """'" ... ...... - ...-., j~ ...-.. . tRI-aDOt IllCR' "'^ ~ '7lMflII.L#nI SCMClIII 0-. NY'1d '"IYnJ4]ONO~ - NOlL YOI'"IddY 9N1NOZ']U 9N/cFTJN/9N2 dN II ;0 b 51,]'J~Vd 'CZ:V9<; dVW XV 1- '1INI'D~'^ 'UNnO:J T1~'1W,]'il,'1 ~rJJ.N'3::> a.H::>J.ON '3'3~HJ. ~ / - *;, J fS! .0" _0. 81l" lft nt ~ii 25 ~!~ ~~ ~:; ~ff i = ~ ~~ ~3~ o~ ~: l ~~ f~ ~~ ~ & -, ::J S \ "-g... ;-~L \ ~~ . . \ . . f' /1.1 ~/f;, /' \ \ \ \ 9.: ~~~ '.)Cl:" " '-.J i,., \(l \()'-.J~Cl) ~~..... I......:;;:: . ~~~~ It)!;:J f.... . ~e3~~ " !;:J:"l: tE~~ :>;:~t..3 W " c:ti ~ ... ~ I <0: lO III a. ~ I-- f.... ~ / ~~S5 /'r~~ - ~lt)V) ~ =- ----- ~~ - - - -----....~---- '\ '\ '\ '\ '\ --- " \ \ \--- ~ ~ '" II ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ':' :s i ~ ~ ~ ':1" ~ ' I'D ; ; ~ P iil ~s i I (, 0 ? Ol 0 CD 0 '" COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 October 29,2007 Clifford H. Fox 4543 Garth Road Charlottesville, Va 22901 RE: ZMA2007-00011 Patterson Subdivision (Sign # 43 & 61) Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 Dear Mr. Fox: On October 16, 2007, the Albemarle County Planning Commission by a vote of 6:0 approved a motion to recommend denial of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. This recommendation of denial was based on the following staff recommendations: Action on ZMA2007-00011: Reasons indicated by staff in report: 1. Cash proffers do not meet Board expectations. 2. The applicant has not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that has been provided. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space is proffered. 3. Affordable housing proffers must be clear on the number of affordable units proffered and use standard language. The proffer to provide accessory apartments is unclear, does not define the type of units to be provided, and does not specifY mechanisms for the provision of the proposed units. Why proffers are considered inadequate, as presented by Staff at meeting: o Affordable Housing Proffer- Unclear whether the applicant intends to proffer 3 or 4 units. The affordable units are proposed as single family attached. 15% of the total number of units proposed is 2.10. o Affordable Accessory Units- Proffer unclear, accessory units proffered with half of the SFD units, a total of 5. o Open Space Dedication to the County- The applicant is proposing to proffer approximately 0.80 acres of open space, adjacent to Lanetown Road, to the County for parks and recreation purposes. This dedication is not desired by Parks & Recreation at this time. o Cash Proffers-$3,000 per market rate unit. There are 10 market rate units proposed and the Board's expectation for single family detached is $17,500 per unit to mitigate impacts of the development. The Commissioners also stated other reasons for not supporting the project in discussion, as follows: o The proposed conceptual layout was not sympathetic to the adjoining neighborhood. o This proposal was not right for this area and there were concerns about the density ofthis project at this location in Crozet. o The applicant did not provide acceptable submittal materials. o There were infrastructure concerns, including sufficient water capacity. School capacity issues are also a concern, with students recently moved from Crozet to Brownsville Elementary School. Storm water and erosion is a problem in Gray Rock and this project did not include workable stormwater conceots. Action on Waivers: . The waivers were not recommended for approval because staff did not find justification in granting variations from the subdivision ordinance required street sections for curb, gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. . The applicant also did not provide enough detail to approve any modifications to standards. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on December 12,2007. It is the Board of Supervisor's preference that a public hearing not be advertised until all ofthe final materials for a zoning application have been received by the County and are available for public review. Therefore any new or additional information regarding your application, including final proffers if applicable, must be submitted to our office at least twenty-one (21) days prior to your scheduled hearing date, which is November 21, 2007. Please review the attached proffer policy established by the Board of Supervisors on December 7, 2005. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale Senior Planner Planning Division RAR/SM cc: Emile Bethanne Patterson POBox 865 Crozet Va 22932 File . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2007-11 Patterson Subdivision STAFF: REBECCA RAGSDALE SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Rezone 3.521 acres from R1 Residential to R6 Residential for 12 residential units AGENDA DATE: December 12,2007 ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACnS): Cilimberg, Ragsdale CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: LEGAL REVIEW: YES (proffers) ATTACHMENTS: YES OWNERlAPPICANT: Emile Bethanne Patterson & J. Daniel Patterson, owners; represented by Clifford H. Fox BACKGROUND: A public hearing was held on this rezoning at the Planning Commission on October 16, 2007 and the Commission supported staff's recommendation in recommending denial of the rezoning and accompanying waiver of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street tree requirements. This motion for denial included the following outstanding issues: o Cash Proffers-$3,000 per market rate unit proffered. There were 10 market rate units proposed and the Board's expectation for single family detached units to offset their impacts to public facilities is $17,500 per unit. o Affordable Housing Proffer- It was unclear in the proffers the number of units being proffered. o Affordable Accessory Units Proffers- This proffer was unclear and did not define accessory units. The applicant had proffered that half of the SFD units proposed, or a total of 5, would have affordable accessory units. o Open Space Dedication to the County- The applicant proposed to proffer approximately 0.80 acres of open space, adjacent to Lanetown Road, to the County for parks and recreation purposes. The dedication was not desired by Parks & Recreation and there is no park shown for this property in the Crozet Master Plan. o Concept Plan- The applicant had not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that had been provided. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space were proffered. o Some Commissioners noted the following additional reasons for not supporting the project in discussion: · The proposed conceptual layout was not sympathetic to the adjoining neighborhood. · This proposal was not right for this area and there were concerns about the density of this project at this location in Crozet. · The applicant did not provide acceptable submittal materials with sufficient information on the concept plan. · There were infrastructure concerns, including sufficient water capacity. School capacity issues were also a concern, with students recently moved from Crozet to Brownsville Elementary School. Storm water and erosion was cited as a problem in Gray Rock and this project did not include workable stormwater concepts. ZMA 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision 80S December 12, 2007 . . . the property is designated CT3 within a Hamlet. The CMP recommends a maximum net density of up to 4.5 units per acre in Hamlets and does not recommend the provision of up to 6.5 units per acre if accessory apartments added for 50% of the residential stock. The applicant's revised proposal limits the number of residential units to 12 with up to four being single family attached and the balance single family detached. The proposed density falls within the guidelines of the Crozet Master Plan for the CT3 Edge designation within the Hamlet Place Type: Crozet Master Patterson Patterson Subdivision Plan Subdivision I Acres Net Crozet Transect Density Acres Min Max Units Net Density CT 3 lMin 3.5, Max 4.5) 3.521 2.82 10 13 12 4.26 Notes: Net acreage is 80% project area. Minimum and Maximum Crozet Master Plan Suggested Units are determined by multiplying the CT 3 suggested densities for each CT type. For example, CT 3 Max is equal to 2.82 x 4.5, which equals 13 units. The CMP also recommends a 10,000 square foot average lot size for Hamlets. The applicant's proposal includes a range of lot sizes from 7,699 to 10,515 square feet in size with an average lot size of 8,839 square feet. The area in lot development and the resulting average lot size has resulted from the provision of the two Bio Filter areas to provide on-site stormwater management. Lot size has been a concern of the adjoining neighborhood Grayrock. The Grayrock Homeowners Association has expressed their concerns in the attached letter. (Attachment II) Proffers The applicant has submitted revised proffers that provide cash proffers of $17,500 per single family detached unit and $11,900 per single family attached unit. The cash proffer amounts are in accord with County policy to mitigate impacts from the proposed development, including those to transportation and schools. The applicant has also proffered affordable housing that meets the County's policy expectations. The open space/park dedication to the County is no longer proposed as it was not desired by Parks and Recreation. The applicant has not proffered the plan, but has committed to limiting the number of residential units on the property to no more than 12, with up to four of those being single family attached and the balance single family detached. Staff believes that given this proffer, the characteristics of the site, and that access is required by VDOT from Lanetown Way, a proffered plan in not essential, although it would provide a commitment to the basic design of the project. (Attachment 1- Proffers) RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended denial of this rezoning. The applicant has addressed outstanding issues cited by staff and the Commission in the recommendation for denial. However, as the Commission has not had the opportunity to review the information submitted after its action, staff cannot verify that the reasons for its recommendation have been fully addressed without this application being referred back to the Planning Commission. Should the Board decide it wants to approve this rezoning as now proposed by the applicant, the attached signed proffers dated December 1, 2007 and received December 3, 2007 are acceptable without substantive changes; however, the County Attorney has indicated that corrections to the proffer numbering are needed. (Attachment I-Proffers) ATTACHMENTS: I. Proffer Statement, dated December 1, 2007 II. Letter from Grayrock Homeowners Association to Rebecca Ragsdale dated December 3, 2007 III. Concept application, labeled by staff as Patterson Subdivision, received November 9, 2007 ZMA 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision BOS December 12, 2007 Corretfi on~ to proffer nomberi(lj .r~ nl(ded. Attachment I Original Proffer l PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: December 1, 2007 ZMA # 2007-000]] Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 3.52] Acres to be rezoned from R-] to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-0001] known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"). Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntari Iy proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the PropeJiy, ifrezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a paJi of the requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING . The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum offifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan. In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of $19,1 00. For example, if 15% equates to ].8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide I Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of $] 5, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable units minus 1.8 affordable units required equaling a 0.2 affordable overage)to Albemarle County, to meet the County's affordable housing requirement. 2. A. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the] 5% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below. The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the Property. The current . Proffer Form Patterson Subdivjsion Page J of4 Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400.00) or sixty-five percent (65%) ofthe applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a "silent" second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein. All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any "silent" second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing. For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. i. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units. The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. 11. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit when the Unites) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office. In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph lA(ii)(l) shall apply for a period often (l 0) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). 2. Conveyance ofInterest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph 1 A. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page 2 of 4 . unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph IA(ii). At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing ofthe conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph I A(ii) have been satisfied. 3. Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy ofthe rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. . B. County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then- CUlTent owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income ofthe purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale. 3. CASH PROFFER A. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e., schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contributions shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: I. Eleven TIlOusand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit II. Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit. 111. Zero Dollars ($0.00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit B. Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer number 3 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing . Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page 3 of 4 Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/kla Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December ] in the preceding calendar year. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 4. Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types. There shall be no more than] 2 dwelling units, these units shall only be comprised of single family detached or single family attached (townhouses) unit types, permitted on the property as a consequence of this rezoning. The 12 dwelling units permitted shall be comprised of no more than four single-family attached (townhouse) units. By: I;~~(l~ Emile Bethanne Patterson (Owner) /~/I/b7 /' l Date: Proffer F onn Patterson Subdivision Page 4 of4 Attachment II . PO Box 245 Crozet · Virginia · 22932 December 03, 2007 Rebecca Ragsdale, Lead Planner Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Subject: Patterson Subdivision (ZMA20070 11 ) Dear Ms Ragsdale: . The Grayrock HOA has met and discussed the subject proposal and requests that this letter be part of the read-ahead staffing package that is prepared for the Board of Supervisors (BOS) public hearing. The Grayrock ROA continues to have serious concerns over the proposal as it exists before the BOS; While the applicant has removed accessory apartments from the plan and reduced the number of dwellings from 14 to 12 since the Planning Commission (PC) hearing we remain convinced that the proposed developments compliance with the Crozet Master Plan (CMP), consistency with the surrounding neighborhood and safety/traffic concerns remain to be sufficiently addressed. Additionally, it seems as though the County's use of the PC to provide recommendations on the parcel has been emasculated by allowing substantive changes to occur between the PC and BOS hearings without additional fonnal review by the PC. The proposed development calls for zoning and lot size that is not in compliance with the CMP, and home types that are not in concert with either Grayrock or the more rural setting on the West side of the property. The proposed development is in an area designated by the CMP as CT3 - Hamlet. Table 1 of the CMP calls for an average lot size of 10,000 sf As shown in the applicant's site concept plan, the average lot size under this rezoning would only be 8,839 sf By comparison, the 26 homes in Grayrock North average a lot size of 12,371 sf The Patterson development as proposed would stand out as a pocket of density in an area that otherwise serves as a transition from residential (R- 4) zoning to the much more rural feel of R....l zoning. . As vehicular access to the proposed development will be exclusively through Grayrock North, we remain deeply concerned by the prospect of increased traffic on Lanetown Way. Lanetown Way was built as a rural section of street (18' wide, no sidewalks). As such, it is used for pedestrian traffic and as play space for the neighborhoods 40+ children. As proposed, the development would add 12 new residences using Lanetown Way. When coupled with unknown future increases in vehicular traffic due to the 'interconnectivity spur' in the site plan, we could expect traffic to increase by at least 46 % when compared with the traffic generated by the existing 26 residences currently using Lanetown Way. We view this possibility as very concerning for the safety of our children and the many pedestrians that enjoy walking and running throughout Grayrock. There have been some procedural irregularities in how this proposal has progressed through milestones required by the County. In order to ensure adequate public involvement and discourse on rezoning issues, County guidelines require that public notice signs be posted at least 15 days prior to public hearing before the PC. In the case of the Patterson property, signs were not posted until five days before the hearing. Additionally, and perhaps of greater concern, there have been substantive changes to the proposal after the PC rendered its recommendation. When this proposal went before the PC on 16 October 2007, it was rejected by a 6~0 vote. While each Commissioner spoke to differing areas of concern, they were united in their assessment that the plan before them had insufficient information for them to render a thoughtful recommendation. In fact the PC directly asked the applicant's agent if he 'wanted to turn this hearing into a work session' due their unease with the lack of detail in the plan. The applicant's agent asked for an up or down vote, and the result was a 'no' recommendation. The plan for the Patterson property has since been modified, yet the PC hasn't reviewed/voted on the plan before the BaS nor has the public had opportunity express its concerns on the new plan for consideration by the PC. Since one of the purposes of appointing a panel of diverse citizens to the PC is to ensure a full vetting of plans that will come before the BaS, shouldn't a 'revised plan' go back to the PC for review, hearing and a vote? We feel that there are at least two sound reasons to reject the Patterson subdivision rezoning/development plan outright as it is proposed: non-compliance with the CMP and safety concerns for children and pedestrians on a section of road that does not have sidewalks. The Grayrock HOA is not opposed to any development of the subject property however, we are opposed to the plan as proposed. Perhaps a better solution is to send this proposal back to the PC for further work until it is able to fully evaluate the revised plan and associated community concerns. The Orayrock HOA will have a representative at the BOS meeting and will be prepared to answer any questions from the BOS or Community Development staff. Sincerely, ~lJ~CL P/U-11thrJUiftL u Tina Munchmeyer President, Orayrock HOA .... .... .... ...... C QJ E .c ~ ~ ...... ~ jaa, oo~ o ,Og = "l ::~nVJS NYld ld3JNOJ Lon \U~ ft1q~{'l pft~(J II-Loot.. vwz (.4~I',,~ ~f1 '? ~~>>-}j."d. JS LOL'Z~i7'8 \ \"0 \9, .~ \~. ~( cz,\ ,. ~. ,\ ./ ~~ ./''/ Ul. ./' SelJ::lO z~~z~<; '0 f..oM JO ty6!tJ SelJJO <;9 ~<;<;. 0 JS 66'9lli7Z JS i7L8'lOi7i7 ~ Jelt I!J O!8 JS ~6i7 TZi7i7 Z Jelt I!J O!8 JS Z9'l6Z<;l l Jelt I!J 0!8 ,,0 ~~ r- .~Q,V C?~ /JS i7L8'l0i7'i7 . !9 < () ~ 0) '/ c>>y -0 . \ Cv .// / \ / '\ <; C6 L- <: a ::tJ <; <Q L- -t :r: SelJ::lO Lll'6nm 8l0<;~i7'Z JO , , S ~6i7TZi7'i7 , /, -1t ().f':P / ,.9S "- 0) ./ QCJ::" "- 0- Y . / <Joe' ,6'SAJ / --{)/ / ~ '\; / ' / ^. " . / , .~ /" , // '\ , / \ , / , / \ / 09 09 Ot oz: A VM JO 1H81tJ 301M 100J 0i7 l3JtJVd HJV3 NO >ilVM30IS 301M 100J <; A "1M JO 1H81tJ NI dltJ1S 8NI1NVld 301M 100J 9 tJ311n8 ~ 8tJnJ 'A VMOVOtJ 301M 100J 8Z NO~JntJ1SNOJ AVMOVOtJ 03S0dOtJd 'i7 S3tJJV lZ<;T :38VtJ3JV S3tJJV lZ<; T :38VCI3JV lV 101 ~9 l3JtJVd '<;<; dVVol XVi :l3JtJ'Vd Vol1 NOStJ311Vd 3NNVH138 3llVol3 :tJ3NMO :VolOI1 VVoltJOJNI AltJ3dOtJd T 'SdVVol A3MJnS lVJI80l038 sn VoldO~U N3>iVl NOl1VolVtJOJNI JIHdVtJ80dOl 'Z 'OOOZ '8l, J30 031"10 "JNI '3lV8 ONV Hsn8vonOtJ A8 03tJVd3tJd 1 Vld V'JOtJJ N3>N1 NOl1VolVtJOJNI AtJVONn08 'l JS V69090l LO~'i7099 Zi7'<; l SO l Z9<;'lU6 SSl '99~6 66S'l806 ZO~'669L ZO~'669L 99l'6U6 6i7 L 'i7~Z 6 90S'9i798 SZ9 '8l S8 LOL 'Z~tg '01v () SJ10N co'v G; JS 6li7'<;l<;'Ol \ ~ ././ \ ./ ./ \ " " " JS ./ ./ ./ ./ 008 .../ \ \ \ ./ . ././ \ ././ \ ./,./ \ ./ ./' \ \~ ./'.0 ./ \ :.a', ./ . ~ \ :.a' . , ~\~ ~\-t- "". \ ../....\ ././ \ ./ ././ \ ././ \ '/''/\ ./ / ./ ./ / ././ ~/ ../ co~' ./ "'1J ./' G,G, /,o1J ./ " /'a'v 'vY' '?' G9<;'l~l'6 ./ ../ ./ ./ ./ JS <;<;l'99~'6 ./ JS 90<;'9t9'8 ./ ./' ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ JS 6tL't~Z'6 JS 66<;'l80'6 ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ JS 99l'6~l'6 ./ ./ ./ ./' ./ ./ ./ ../ JS GO~'669'L '^" / ~~ <::b ,,~ ()() () y ~~ () .:0 ()~ :elZIS tOI el6oJel^V / C/6 / \-\\) / \ c)) / JS 6l9'l6Z'<; l / / , 'v,/,o ~ 'L~' ~ '/ ~ , / / 'LCV \ /' / '. co"" "~. ~ '? J"I n tOl II tOl Ol tOl 6 tOl 8 tOl L tOl · 9 tOl <; tOl i7 tOl ~ tOl G tOl l tOl \ \ \ \ :S.JI1'v'lnJl'v'J 3~'v'Sn ON'v'l . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA 2007-0011 Patterson Staff: Rebecca Ragsdale Subdivision; Waivers requested of curb & gutter and sidewalk & planting strip street requirements Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: October 16, 2007 December 12, 2007 Owners: Emile Bethanne Patterson & J. Daniel Applicant: Clifford H. Fox Patterson Acreage: 3.521 acres Rezone: R1 Residential to R6 Residential TMP: TMP 55-63 By-right use: 1 dwelling unit per acre residential uses, potentially up to five units with bonus/clustering provisions; supporting uses permitted in R-1 such as schools, churches, and clubs by special use permit. Magisterial District: White Hall Proffers: Yes Proposal: Single Family subdivision Requested # of Dwelling Units: 14, gross density of 3.9 units/acre; net density of 4.9/acre DA (Development Area): Community of Crozet Compo Plan Designation: CT 3 Urban Edge in the Crozet Master Plan Character of Property: Rural residential with an Use of Surrounding Properties: rural residential, Gray existing house Rock North subdivision Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The rezoning is consistent with the Crozet 1. Cash proffers do not meet Board expectations. Master Plan recommendations. 2. The applicant has not made proffer commitments 2. The applicant provided affordable to features of the concept plan provided. housing. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space is proffered. 3. Affordable housing proffers must be clear on the number of affordable units proffered and the proffer to provide accessory apartments is not enforceable. RECOMMENDATION: Staff can only recommend approval of this rezoning if the Board's cash proffer expectations are met, if commitments are made to features of the application plan, and affordable housing proffers are revised. With these changes, staff could recommend approval of the rezoning; however, staff cannot recommend approval of the street waivers. The Commission is asked to take public comment and the applicant requested a public hearing on this project. The applicant may ask that this meeting be treated as a work session and then request a deferral until outstanding issues can be resolved. If the applicant requests action, staff must recommend denial until outstanding issues can be resolved. STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REBECCA RAGSDALE October 16, 2007 December 12,2007 ZMA 07-12 PATTERSON SUBDIVISION Waiver of Section Curb and gutter Sections 14-410 H & I Waiver of Section 14.422 E Sidewalks & Planting Strips PETITION PROJECT: ZMA 2007 - 00011 Patterson Subdivision PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 unit/acre) to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 14 dwelling units. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT- 3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: Between Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Road, Lanetown Road, and Railroad Avenue. TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall CHARACTER OF THE AREA The property is 3.521 acres in size, with an existing house that dates to 1900, and is zoned R 1 Residential. Properties adjacent to the north and west are zoned R 1 and are low density residential, similar in character to the Patterson property. To the south and east of the property is the Grayrock north subdivision, which is zoned PRO and developed as single family homes on an average lot size of X acre, approximately 4 dwelling units per acre. (Attachment A-Zoning and Attachment H-Aerial Map) BY-RIGHT USE OF THE PROPERTY The current zoning of the property is R1 Residential. R1 zoning allows 0.97 units per acre and minimum lot sizes of 45,000 square feet, or 30,000 with clustering, and a density of 1.45 units per acre under standard provisions and minimum lot sizes of 30,000 square feet, or 20,000 square feet under bonus provisions. Since the property is 3.521 acres in size, up to 5 dwelling units may be possible with clustering/bonus provisions. SPECIFICS OF PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to rezone to the R6 Residential zoning district but has not provided a detailed rezoning plan. The concept plan provided by the applicant has not been engineered and it is the applicant's intent to commit to certain aspects of the plan through proffers. Details would be finalized with site development plan or subdivision plat applications. At present, there is no proffered plan or identification of features from the concept plan that would be proffered. Proffers have been submitted and are provided as Attachment B. 2 . . . The applicant has provided a conceptual lot layout, including 12 lots, two of which would have two-single family attached units, for a total of 14 residential units. (Attachment G- Concept Plan) The conceptual layout includes approximately 0.80 acres designated for open space adjacent to Lanetown Road and provisions for stormwater management adjacent to Lanetown Way. The green/open space is proposed for dedication to the County and parking has been provided at the end of the 40' public road proposed. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST The applicant has indicated that this project would provide a range of housing stock that will include affordable accessory units. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Crazet Master Plan The property is located within a Neighborhood as defined in the Crozet Master Plan, at the edge of the northwestern edge of the Crozet Development Area. The northern boundary of the Community of Crozet follows Lanetown Road adjacent to this property. (see inset below and Crozet Master Plan Attachment I) Crozet Master Plan Place Type and Built Infrastructure Map .'. Site Proposed for rezoning The property is designated NeighborhoodNillage Edge (CT3-yellow) in the Crozet Master Plan. The Edge areas are intended to support neighborhood centers with predominantly residential uses, especially single family detached. The Crozet Master Plan specifies net density rather than gross density as a guide for rezonings. The Zoning Ordinance requirements are based on gross density so both calculations are provided in this report. Net residential density recommended in the plan is 3.5-4.5 units per acre. The plan provides a recommendation of up to 6.5 units per acre if they are accessory 'fV)f-\ O. 11 Datterson Subdivisi011 Planning Commissiof1 10/9/07 Bndrd of Supervisors 12/12/07 3 apartments added for 50% of the residential stock. Lot sizes of 10,000 square feet are recommended in CT3 areas with 1-2 story structures at street level. The applicant is proposing 14 units and the range of units suggested by the plan are 10- 13 units for this property, or up to 18 with provisions for additional affordable/accessory apartments. The proposed net density is 4.9 units/acre and this is within the guidelines for this property in the Master Plan. This is a gross density of 3.9 units/acre. The breakdown of net density based on the Crozet Master Plan is provided below. Patterson Subdivision Crozet Master Plan Patterson Subdivision Crozet Transect Density T Acres Net Acres Min Max Max Plan Units* Units Net Densitv CT 3 (Min 3.5. Mid 4.5. Max*6.5/acre) 3.521 2.82 10 13 18 14 4.97 Notes: Net acreage is 80% project area. * Density of 6.5 units per acre in CT 3 only if 50% accessory/affordable units added Minimum, Mid, and Maximum Crozet Master Plan Suggested Units are determined by multiplying the CT 3 suggested densities for each CT type. For example, CT 3 Mid is equal to 2.82 x 4.5, which equals 13 units. The Green Infrastructure map in the Master Plan reflects open space resources and shows proposed greenways behind neighborhoods, along the ponds in Gray Rock and to Lanetown Road. The intent is to provide access for these neighborhoods to Downtown and other park destinations. (See inset below.) Crozet Master Plan Green Infrastructure Map " 1,\ ~\ '"I ...\"" "~ i"..__-- - ,\ ~. - \,. , .-- .. \':...J " '., ... ~--- 'w~....~, .. # ,. - \. .~~. . ~v i" r. .,- ! _/ The applicant has proposed an active recreation area/park of approximately 0.80 acres adjacent to Lanetown Road. (Attachment G & H ) This greenspace area is not shown on the Green Infrastructure plan, however is an appropriate greenspace/amenity to serve the proposed development on the Patterson property. It is proposed as a public park, however, it does not meet Parks and Recreation requirements for a public park. 71IJA 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Plannirg.ommission lO/g/O' Boara of Supervisors 12/.2/07 4 . . . Neighborhood Model The Neighborhood Model describes the more "urban" form of development desired for the Development Areas. The following is an assessment of this proposal's consistency with the Neighborhood Model's 12 principles: Pedestrian The applicant is proposing two alternate street sections, either a rural Orientation road section to serve the development with pedestrian access on only one side of the street as a trail or an urban section with a sidewalk on only one side. As proposed, neither is a workable approach to providing pedestrian access. The trail does not meet County standards and the section is not acceptable to VDOT. This issue is discussed in more detail in the waivers section. This principle is not met. Neig h borhood New projects within the Development Areas are expected to have Friendly Streets curb, gutter, sidewalk, and planting strips as features of streets and Paths servicing new development and this is a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant has requested a waiver of this requirement, submitting two alternative street sections for County review. (Attachment C) One proposes a rural section with a trail on one side and the other proposes an urban section with a planting strip and sidewalk on one side. The waiver is discussed below. This principle is not met. Interconnected VDOT recommends that only one entrance be provided to this Streets and relatively small property through Lanetown Way, through Gray Rock Transportation North and that there be no access through the property to Lanetown Networks Road. The parcel is relatively small and interconnections would only be anticipated to properties to the east, however the applicant has not provided this on the concept plan and it is a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. However, it appears that this principle could be met. Parks and Open The applicant is proposing a 0.80 acre greenspace/field that would Space serve this development and be located adjacent to Lanetown Road. It has been proposed for dedication to the County but the Parks & Recreation Department believes it should be maintained by a homeowners association and does not meet their requirements for a County park. Staff believes that the area designated for greenspace is adequate in size. Typically, it is better if these amenities are centrally located within developments. However, this site on the edge of the Development Area and the park is proposed as a transition to the Rural Area edge. This principle is met. Neighborhood Downtown Crozet and Old Trail, with its proposed center, appear to Centers be the closest neighborhood centers. The proposed park area serves as a focal point within the development. This principle is met. Building and The applicant is proposing a residential development under R-6 Spaces of Human zoning, which allows a maximum building height of 35 feet and front Scale setbacks of 25'. Typically, shallower setbacks are more in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. Street trees and sidewalks provide a 5 Mixture of Uses Relegated Parking Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability Redevelopment Site Planning that Respects Terrain Clear Boundaries with the Rural Areas greater sense of enclosure and if these are provided, then this rinci Ie could be met. Given the Crozet Master Plan designation of CT3, non-residential uses are not ex ected on this ro ert . This rinci Ie is met. The applicant's concept plan does not demonstrate how parking will be provided and whether garages would be associated with the single family units. There is no information for staff to comment on this rinci Ie. The applicant is proposing single family units, accessory apartments to be associated with half of the single family units, and four single family attached units as affordable. This principle is met. The property is redeveloping from rural residential to density in keeping with the Crozet Master Plan and the existing house will be demolished. This rinci Ie is met. The site is relatively flat and topography is shown on the aerial exhibit submitted by the applicant. (Attachment I) No conceptual grading has been provided. There is no information for staff to comment on this rinci Ie; however, it a ears this rinci Ie could be met. Lanetown Road delineates the edge of the Rural Areas. The park area of the development is located adjacent to the Rural Area boundary as a transition between the Development Area and Rural Area. This rinci Ie is met. Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district The applicant has requested a rezoning to R6 Residential and the intent of that district in the Ordinance and lot and setback requirements are provided here: This district (hereafter referred to as R-6) is to provide a plan implementation zone that: -Provides for compact, medium-density residential development; (Amended 9-9-92) -Permits a variety of housing types; and -Provides incentives for clustering of development and provision oflocational, environmental and developmental amenities. R-6 districts may be permitted within community and urban area locations recommended for medium- density residential use in the comprehensive plan. (Amended 9-9-92) 16.3 AREA .4..~D BITLKREGl:LATIO]\"S AFEA .~D 3ULK REGULATIC~S STANDARD LEVEL BC1,JS LEVEL CONVENTIONAL CLUSTER CO~lENTIONJl.L CLUSTER REQUIREl1ENTS DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPl-lENT X:'EVELOPl1Ei.U DEV"ELOP~NT Gross density 6 duiacre 6 duiacre 9 dll/acre 9du/acre },.fiDimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 7,260 SQ ft ::\iA 4,840 sa ft. N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side(<) 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 1Heet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) MinimunHide,'lIl'CIs shall be r~ucedto notle.~ thanteu (10) feet inaccordancewiths~tion4.11.3. (Amended 1-1-83) Maximum Structure heiEbt 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet ZMA 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Planning Commission 10/9/07 Board of S.Jpervisors 12/12/07 6 . The R-4 Zoning district was also discussed with the applicant and has been suggested as more appropriate by neighboring property owners. The intent of the R-4 district is essentially the same as R-6, except that it notes that it is intended to provide for compact, medium density, single family development. However, both districts allow attached units. The applicant is proposing a gross density of 3.9 dwelling units per acre but would like flexibility in lot size so is requesting R6 Zoning, which allows a minimum of 4,840 square feet with bonus/clustering provision. Staff supports the request for R-6 Zoning and believes the applicant's proposal meets the intent of that zoning district and the applicant is proffering to limit the number of units to 14, which assures density will not exceed what could be developed under R4 Zoning. Anticipated impact on public facilities and services Environmental & Stormwater Manaaement- There are no environmental resources on this property that would be impacted by the proposed development. There is not enough information on this plan for engineering comments regarding the stormwater areas shown on the concept plan. (Attachment H- Concept Plan) The applicant would be expected to meet all requirements of the Water Protection Ordinance at site plan or subdivision application. It appears that these provisions of the ordinance could be met on site but could affect the applicant's ability to achieve the maximum of 14 units proposed. . Streets - The property has access to both Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way, through Gray Rock North. VDOT recommends that only the connection to Lanetown Way be made because the proposed connection to route 684 is less that 200 feet from the closest intersection and that is not a desirable situation. VDOT also has concerns about the perpendicular parking proposed at the end of the road to serve the proposed development and the typical road sections provided by the applicant. (Attachment E- VDOT comments) Schools - Students from this development would impact Crozet area schools and likely attend Crozet Elementary School, Henley Middle School and Western Albemarle High School. Cash impacts are intended to provide for impacts to schools. Fire. Rescue. Police -The Crozet Volunteer Fire Station and the Western Albemarle Rescue Station provide fire and rescue services to the area. The planned Ivy Area Station will also augment services provide by the existing fire and rescue stations in Crozet. Albemarle County 5th Street Office Building houses the County's Police Department, although the police patrol all areas of the County. Fire Rescue has requested that the applicant verify adequate fireflow with site development/subdivision plans. . Utilities - This property is in the Albemarle County Service Authority's jurisdictional area for water and sewer service. There is a 6" water line on the north side of Lanetown Road and an 8" sanitary sewer line in Lanetown Way. Final water and sewer plans are required for ACSA approval. The sewer plans will also have to include offsite plans and easements for that portion crossing properties of others. 7 Anticipated impact on cultural and historic resources Existing structures on the property would be demolished with this proposal and the existing structure on the property has not been determined significant. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties Neighbors within the adjoining Grayrock North development have expressed concerns about this proposal changing the character of the area and also about Lanetown Way serving as access to it. In the Development Areas, however, development is expected and this property is designated CT3 in the Crozet Master Plan. Staff believes that impacts can be mitigated. Public need and justification for the change The change in zoning is consistent with the CT3 designation of the Land Use Plan and would provide for residential capacity in a Development Area. PROFFERS The applicant has submitted six proffers (Attachment B). They are summarized here with staff comments. 1. Maximum Number of Units-The applicant has proposed limiting the number of dwellings to 14 total with the proposed development, which staff supports. However, it should further specify that only 4 of those units will be single family attached. 2. Affordable Housing-The applicant intends to providing affordable housing, however it is unclear whether the applicant intends to proffer 3 or 4 units. The affordable units are proposed as single family attached. The County's policy is that 15% of the total number of units would be provided as affordable and 15% of 14, the total number of units proposed is 2.10. The proffers should be revised using standard language and clarifying how many units are actually proffered. 3. Affordable Accessory Units-The applicant has proffered to provide affordable accessory units with half of the 10 single family units proposed. It is not clear whether accessory apartments meeting the zoning ordinance definition are provided or if the applicant intends to provide accessory type units, such as apartments above the garage. The Zoning Ordinance defines accessory apartments as "A separate, independent dwelling unit contained within the structure of and clearly subordinate to a single-family detached dwelling, as distinguished from a duplex or other two-family dwelling" and supplemental regulations also apply. If it is to provide accessory apartments as defined in the ordinance, a proffer to build the units can be enforced but not a provision to ensure that they are occupied with low-to -moderate income individuals. 4. Open Space Dedication to the County- The applicant is proposing to proffer approximately 0.80 acres of open space propose in the development, adjacent to Lanetown Road, to the County for parks and recreation purposes. The Crozet Master Plan does not designate a park on this property and Parks & Recreation would not accept the open space dedication, based on the following reasons: o To access the area, the public would have to enter through a private development, which could become programmatic for the residents of that development and the County. 8 . . . o Given its location, it would be utilized more by the residents, and not the general public. o The size of the field limits its use and by whom. o In general, the size and location is more suitable for the residents as open space and it would be difficult to justify placing it under County ownership and including it in the County's maintenance program. 5. Lanetown Road Access restricted- The applicant is proffering to close the existing access to Lanetown Road with development of the property, which was a requirement of VDOT. Access for the property would be provided via Lanetown Way. This is provided as a proffer since no proffered plan has been provided. 6. Cash Proffers-The applicant has not proffered the cash amount per market rate unit expected by the Board's policy. An amount of $30,000 is offered, which is $3,000 per market rate unit. There are 10 market rate units proposed and the Board's expectation for single family detached is $17,500 per unit. The applicant is proffering a reduced amount since the open space area is proposed for dedication to the County, however it is not shown on the Crozet Master Plan and not eligible for credit based on the Board's policy. WAIVERS The applicant has requested waivers for curb and gutter and sidewalks and street trees, since they are only proposed on one side of the street. Curb & Gutter waiver Sections14-410 H & I set forth the requirement and design standards for curb and gutter in the development areas. Section 14-410 I contain the findings that must be made to support a modification of these requirements. These sections are provided below. H. Curb, curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. Sidewalks and planting strips shall designed and constructed in compliance with section 14-422. I. Waiver of requirement for curb or curb and gutter. The requirement for curb or curb and gutter may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14-225.1. A request for a waiver may be made prior to or with submittal of a preliminary plat or with an application to rezone the land, as follows: 2. Consideration and findings. In reviewing a waiver request to allow a rural cross-section (no curb and no curb and gutter) instead, the commission shall consider: (i) the number of lots in the subdivision and the types of lots to be served; The street would serve no more than 14 residential units on 12 lots. Lots could be as small as 4,840 square feet under R6 Zoning. (ii) the length of the street; The street as shown on the concept plan provided by the applicant is approximately 400 feet long. 9 (iii) whether the proposed street(s) or street extension connects into an existing system of streets constructed to a rural cross-section; The proposed road connects to Lanetown Way, which is an existing rural cross section in Gray Rock, which is developed with quarter acre to one-third acre lots. (iv) the proximity of the subdivision and the street to the boundaries of the development and rural areas; Lanetown Road is within the Crozet Development Area boundary and this street section would be located within the development area. (v) whether the street terminates in the neighborhood or at the edge of the development area or is otherwise expected to provide interconnections to abutting lands; The street as proposed terminates within the proposed development at a proposed parking lot intended to serve the park and single family attached units. (vi) whether a rural cross-section in the development areas furthers the goals of the comprehensive plan, with particular emphasis on the neighborhood model and the applicable neighborhood master plan; It has not been demonstrated how the proposed rural cross-section would further the goals of the neighborhood model. Adequate pedestrian facilities are not provided for under the applicant's two cross section options. (vii) whether the use of a rural crosssection would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully implemented; and The rural cross section does not further implementing the Neighborhood Model. (viii) whether the proposed density of the subdivision is consistent with the density recommended in the land use plan section of the comprehensive plan. The density of the proposal is in keeping with the Crozet Master Plan. In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring curb or curb and gutter would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sonnd engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. It has not been demonstrated how a rural cross section would further public, health, safety, and welfare. Given the size of the lots and that no engineering has been done to support the concept plan, curb and gutter may be needed for stormwater reasons and the required Subdivision Ordinance streetscape is important in implementing the Neighborhood Model. Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of this waiver. Sidewalk & Plantina Strips Waiver Sections14-422 A, B & C of the Subdivision Ordinance set forth the requirements and design standards for sidewalks and planting strips, which specify that a 5' concrete sidewalk and 6' planting strip should be provided on both sides of a street, with the planting strip between the curb and sidewalk. (Attachment F) Street trees and sidewalks provide a greater sense of enclosure and this is important in creating a Neighborhood 10 . Model form of development. The applicant has proposed conventional lots on a rural section with deeper setbacks than what staff typically sees for a rezoning in the development areas, staff believes sidewalks and planting strips should be provided. Because the applicant has not provided a workable alternative street section design and the curb and gutter waiver is not recommended, staff has not done a detailed analysis of this waiver. The ordinance section is provided as Attachment F for the Commission's reference. Recommendation: Staff does not recommend this waiver. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this rezoning and special use permits requested: 1. The rezoning is consistent with the Crozet Master Plan recommendations for density. 2. The applicant has provided affordable housing. . Staff has identified factors unfavorable to this request 1. Cash proffers do not meet Board expectations. 2. The applicant has not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that has been provided. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space is proffered. 3. Affordable housing proffers must be clear on the number of affordable units proffered and use standard language. The proffer to provide accessory apartments is unclear, does not define the type of units to be provided, and does not specify mechanisms for the provision of the proposed units. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: ZMA 2007-00 Staff can only recommend approval of this rezoning if the Board's cash proffer expectations are met, if commitments are made to features of the application plan, and affordable housing proffers are revised. With these changes, staff could recommend approval of the rezoning; however, staff cannot recommend approval of the street waivers. The Commission is asked to take public comment and the applicant requested a public hearing on this project. The applicant may ask that this meeting be treated as a work session and then request a deferral until outstanding issues can be resolved. If the applicant requests action, staff must recommend denial until outstanding issues can be resolved. . Curb & Gutter and Sidewalks & Plantina Strips Waivers Staff does not recommend approval of these waivers. 11 ATTACHMENTS A. Zoning Map B. Proffers C. Waiver/street section request D. Engineering Comments E. VDOT comments F. Subdivision Ordinance Section 422 G. Concept Plan H. Aerial Map with Greenways & proposed park shown I. Crozet Master Plan Place Type & Built Infrastructure Map 12 I i ~ I f " ~ Ii I~ JJII . i ~! If i j ! II 1 Ii 01 I 101 I.r 10 I J i I I I ! . . " j .. Attachment A I Ii ! ~ I - , i I I j 8 <jz = . J I I I I ~ I ~ I t I I .~ N S I ! ! f Ul '" i 1 ) f ~~ .. J ~ -= I I ~ ~ ~ .. ~ r i j ,0 OJ ~ I . . !au N er: ... .... .rn C)~ ~ - ~ - ~ -< C! i . t \0 o:t I an an c.~E:E:'" ~ ~o/ 0 <P .0~1? ~~~ ~,:~.~il !I-'t.; an o:t I an an s:: o ~ C1) = co Q. P'l o:t I an an u. o o:t I an an ~8 ~ . 04: ... o:t I an an ... o:t I an an , ( Attachment B Proffer Form Attachment. Date: September 19,2007 ZMA # 2007-011 Tax Map 55, parcel 63; consisting of3.521 acres to be rezoned from R-l to R6. The owner agrees to proffer the following elements within the context of ZMA 2007-011. 1.) There shall be no more than fourteen (14) dwelling units developed on the property as a consequence of this rezoning. 2.) There shall be included in the development three (4) affordable housing units provided as single family attached units within the subdivision available to potential purchasers at approximately 80% of median income as defined by the Albemarle County Housing Department. The affordable units may either be leased or sold at the owner's discretion. 3.) Additional affordable accessory apartments shall be provided on 50% of the market rate lots. The affordable accessory apartments will be provided on 5 of the 10 market rate lots. 4.) The owner shall transfer ownership of the Open Space, approximately 38,400 square feet, and the trail ( if applicable) to Albemarle County at a time acceptable to Albemarle County and the owner but within 6 months of the subdivision's road having been accepted into the State Secondary Road System by VDOT. The owner shall not be required to improve the open space other than as agreed to at the owners sole discretion. 5.) The owner will close the existing driveway into the property when VDOT approves the new entrance fronting on Lanetown Way, the existing dwelling has been abandoned and the new Lanetown Way entrance to the property has been constructed and approved by VDOT. 6.) The owner agrees to pay, or cause payment, to Albemarle County a cash proffer in the amount $3,000 per market rate dwelling at the time a building permit is issued for that particular subdivision lot. There will be 10 market rate lots; consequently a total cash proffer for the 10 market rate lots will be $30,000. Owner ILl Attachment C . ZMA - 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision Requestfor Waivers for Sections 14.410.1, Curb and Gutter; Section 14.422. Paragraphs D and E respectively Planting Strip and Sidewalks. Please find attached a vicinity map showing the surrounding neighborhoods to Tax Map 55, parcel 63. The map scale is 150' to 1". Topographic data is provided at 5' intervals. A boundary survey is included in the packet. A lot layout concept with relevant schematic road and green way concepts is provided by separate attachment. Justification: All of the surrounding road sections are rural sections and with no sidewalks. Weare asking for a rural section so as to maintain the existing character of the area and neighborhood. From the map provided instead of a sidewalk we would install a path that would connect to the existing greenway system in Gray Rock and Crozet Glen Subdivisions. If curb and gutter section is required we would ask that that section be 26'cc with a sidewalk or path on one side providing the best access from the greenway system to the proposed donated active recreation area in Patterson Subdivision. . . ,/ .. ._~6~!~?C~~~)~S___S~~JX~~'!i2L~_..... ..... ........_...,.' _,om ~ r-. t -r~G T>o~{A l,i.o hc5\";)Q.L ,'I ;'h C)~.' 1! '0'1" S , 1 Attachment C ~^' ~ 'p- i i~~I..V\^'(~._! X 'J ...1-1',1_1 cr', 'oJ ....h tt'J,,- ::&- C.i;- r c--,..... 40 ( 'Row r"- ,cg-1 --T- ~ ' ' 1,--- ' - ~====T:-r-:--"-'- -- ,./ . ,( -, >< ---'1 Y 'V;;;;-'- - , 'Iii f I/'f I . I '/1 l'i" I I.j : I u{ I;" 'I:~S Ii', . . ." '''<.:..,. ~j . : ' ~ B, "" 1- t (, 1 ~ ?AAJ-<2..I--\,{V/V\ CO'f\"':>i'YI)CiIO," ,-0 r, f\ .. I..ll ",.I -J"'~ 0-' Ie .r) f.;\ 1..-';-.-'\ ~ l')'~ IjJt'\..... ....--"'--1\. - t r" v" V_I 2-000 V P 6T ?'f'v~. "",-"-" ~ b: <'^ '(... (~'" ,,0,_ ~./ C)v.\)d."J$,\c.,......~...- '"'t' .....~,:"...'I'.......,r.l,;.,{',-I \!I;1-\~-.I'___ ,-0 '( ~ ~ _J' -... - ,'~, -.-, \ " L\e)' ROvJ , )'A_bJ\ V;,,)i~ . I <_. }. \. \ 8 Vf\,\KL-1i\"~~"'-', IV YYVW..k.-* V-DcIT )000 \.) 'l:\~\( ~~ 5R c.l~~ <" \ 1 \" :;,1"''I.d(JL. \' -:i:..c.""f^' /1 ,t ~ '0-'1 L~- 1 C\,,,.L,- .., 1 I-F:' t,QQ... 2 -,') he lj, \~ I . \ ~ ~(C) R. ~\ '- ...,.... .\ , ) J.. 1'1, uf :fr.\l t./L.- 4- rr:'AH~ s '\ LV'- $J f'.( \L \,v I I \rA'ie..\I-~MJ 1)(<,,'((" t-JO ':.( 1"'>5::. I i 'I' rp,:0\}~ _~'n 5.:: r\~ \ ~. \:) - --.-...--....-i--. '\ L_ ) c/ c\ "b GJ- C( v"Mc)( <:x~ <: ~. \~~, \ A "I' ".- I'-' , J r r u( L-,~ / L: ;2*/ c....r' < t', .,_.._._' _ ..;",. "~C,,J~h ''''''''-'''-7', --; ~I , _ 'lo ' 't'~t.. "',-f-)\, . '~~':'~"~'~-:;~F;=~~~2:~~~ .. =~ \':j"' 3 -~ Q- .....Q ct- ...Q ',. .::S 'V I'l ' r;) I ""'\,')I1( Ie ,., ""'\\'~\' -'\\i ,;.+..' l A-\J Il- ~ ~ J y' v " ", I.....~ M'" ....'Y.., , y, '-1" \ ,;\..,'-. "';1'1>'1,.(1 f" Ie! ~"d i ' ...... \'~' ), ',,' ,'. \. ".. ' \,">... " \it-:,(: l il,,,-' <'C(',.1."'''' (I>.::"."'., ,- ,I ,- .,-, . if :r .,. \. " j.. . - -.' J "~ I j. (","':1\ " ,,1: {V ( ~ i 'Tl~- P t "~{,jVv\._Q. (: "~ .,.:'.1. c.... '0 -.-r~' ~/~I ~ \..,/) :S U \~'--'" ..... ::..:.;. ':t.:. (~ <:: '-+ <:::: c' ~b to S<c ft.~ 1/ I ;: 10 I i I ( . . . Attachment E Rebecca Ragsdale From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [JoeI.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 1: 14 PM To: Rebecca Ragsdale Subject: ZMA 2007-11 Patterson Subdivision Rebecca, I have reviewed the Patterson Subdivision plan and I am concerned about the end with the parking. State roads cannot have perpendicular parking on them so this section would need to be private. In addition, there would need to be a turnaround at the end of state maintenance that meets the standards in appendix "8" of VDOT's Road Design Manual. Also, the typical section for the rural section has 2 foot shoulders. This is only acceptable when pedestrian facilities are located behind a ditch. So there should be a ditch between the road and the path on the right side. On the left side, there should be a four foot shoulder. When guardrail is needed, there should be a 7 foot shoulder. The curb and gutter section is shown as 26 feet. The normal standard is 28 feet but we can accept 26 feet if it is the recommendation of the county. In this situation, I would like to be assured that there would not be parking expected regularly along the street. If you have any questions, please call me. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 joel.denunzio@VirginiaDOT.org -------~---------_._-~--"---~--------~- From: Rebecca Ragsdale [mailto:rragsdale@albemarle.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 03,20079:27 AM To: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. Subject: ZMA 2007-11 Patterson Importance: High Joel- Were you able to take a look at this rezoning that I sent over. I am most interested in your comments on the street section proposed, which is to be public, but has parking lot proposed at the end of it. It was in the same envelope as Avon Park II. -Rebecca Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner County of Alhemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville. VA 22902-4,596 (434) 296-,5832 Ext. 3439 Fax (434) 972-40]2 E-mail: rragsdale(~!allwmarle.org 1 ()/Of')()()"] Attachment F C. The setting of any monument at any time after recordation of the final plat shall be established both at law and in equity, at prorated positions as determined from direct remeasurements between the established monuments of record rather than as precisely stated or shown on the recorded plat. D. The subdivider shall be responsible for resetting any monument on the property which is damaged, disturbed or destroyed during construction of any improvements required by this chapter. (~ 18-39 (part), 9-5-96, 10-19-77,5-10-77, 8-28-74); ~ 18-55 (part), 9-5-96, 2-4-81, 8-28-74 (~ 8); 1988 Code, ~~ 18-39, 18-55; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98, ~ 14-524; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference-oVa. Code 9 ]5.2-224](7). 14-422 Sidewalks and planting strips. Sidewalks and planting strips shall be provided as follows: A. Requirement. Sidewalks and planting strips for street trees and other vegetation shall be established on both sides of each new street within a subdivision creating lots for single family detached and single family attached dwellings in the development areas. B. Sidewalk design. Each sidewalk proposed to be accepted for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation shall be designed and constructed according to Virginia Department of Transportation standards or to the standards in the design standards manual, whichever is greater. Each sidewalk proposed to be privately maintained shall be constructed using concrete, designed so that no concentrated water flow runs over them, and otherwise satisfy the standards in the design standards manual. The agent may allow privately maintained sidewalks to be a 10-foot multi-use asphalt path in unique circumstances such as a path leading to a school or major employment center. The asphalt path generally shall run parallel to the street and shall be constructed to a standard deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare. C. Sidewalk ownership. Each sidewalk proposed to be accepted for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation shall be dedicated to public use. Each sidewalk proposed to be privately maintained shall be conveyed to a homeowners association for ownership and maintenance. The agent may require that a sidewalk proposed by the subdivider to be privately maintained instead be dedicated to public use if the agent determines there is a need for the sidewalks to be publicly owned and maintained. D. Planting strip design. Each planting strip shall be a minimum of six (6) feet in width except that the minimum width may be less in areas of transition between rural cross-section and urban cross-section streets. On an urban cross-section street, the planting strip shall be located between the curb and the sidewalk. The planting strip shall be located between the paved travelway and the sidewalk. E, Waivers from sidewalk requirements. The requirements for sidewalks may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14-225.1. A request for a waiver may be made prior to or with submittal of a preliminary plat or with an application to rezone the land, as follows: 1. Information to be submitted. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (I) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of five hundred (500) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable; and (vii) the location of any existing pedestrian network in the area, whether it is publicly or privately maintained, descriptions by 14-58 Supp #14,7-05 ,i . ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE widths and surfaces of the pedestrian ways within the existing pedestrian network, a proposed alternative profile and the intended ownership and maintenance. 2. Consideration andfindings, In reviewing a request to waive the requirement for sidewalks, the commission shall consider whether: (i) a waiver to allow a rural cross-section has been granted; (ii) a surface other than concrete is more appropriate for the subdivision because of the character of the proposed subdivision and the surrounding neighborhood; (iii) sidewalks on one side of the street are appropriate due to environmental constraints such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, floodplain, or wetlands, or because lots are provided on only one side of the street; (iv) the sidewalks reasonably can connect into an existing or future pedestrian system in the area; (v) the length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide a public benefit; (vi) an alternate pedestrian system including an alternative pavement could provide more appropriate access throughout the subdivision and to adjoining lands, based on a proposed alternative profile submitted by the subdivider; (vii) the sidewalks would be publicly or privately maintained; (viii) the waiver promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the applicable neighborhood master plan; and (ix) waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring sidewalks would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. F . Waivers from planting strip requirements. The requirements for planting strips may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14-225. I. A request for a waiver may be made prior to or with submittal of a preliminary plat or with an application to rezone the land, as follows: . I. Information to be submitted. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (I) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual plan at a scale no smaller than one (I) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of five hundred (500) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. 2. Consideration and findings. In reviewing a request to waive any requirement for planting strips, the commission shall consider whether: (i) a waiver to allow a rural cross-section has been granted; (ii) a sidewalk waiver has been granted; (iii) reducing the size of or eliminating the planting strip promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the applicable neighborhood master plan; and (iv) waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring planting strips would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, and to the land adjacent thereto. (9-5-96, 10-19-77,5-10-77,8-28-74; 1988 Code, S 18-39; Ord. 98-A(I), 8-5-98, S 14-525; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference-oVa. Code ~ 15.2-2241 (5). 14-423 Street signs. Signs identifYing the name of each street within a subdivision shall be installed and maintained as provided in chapter 7 of the Code. . (Ord. 98-A(I), 8-5-98, S 14-526; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-.20-05) State law reference-oVa Code ~ 15.2-20] 9. 14-59 Supp. #]4, 7-05 [.\ II IV. \"- \ . " C..'i / ..... = ~ e -= (J e': ..... ..... < II~N~1 h~t"~~~-- /' /' ,o~=,"l 7l-ll.::>S: ~7~--- ~( .g l::J <1.11~~~ - \f1/'1~j,.J Jo..ttl,..~atS . (fit. i ~, -! ,() / S"'ll <:5' ~ ~ ,() J'"" <:'l S> ~ // ---....., "L/ ----- , ~-_// ~ t..~ / J'" i .c ~ I c; 06 J'~ J( <l I \ I S'-<' I ><l f'> r- i \ "'0('> \S' \ ~ ~ od <l ~ ~ ~~ ~ ," .:E. '?' j\ ~~ , .- J \- \' ....i .."'- / ~ / ooCb \A..D ,IS! ^1~Y)> NQ SJO"~~ / ~ ~ .... ~ C Gl E .c ~ (.l ~ .! <[ !il ------=- z N'1 ...oQ.., _ C'd ~~ o.:~ Lt") . 5 Lt")U ~> ~~ '- ><~ ~"l.. j ~ . .. i. :;; tj r . -5 · .S ~~ 1.1 " I ~- ell .. iH j;tj 1 ~~J !ll= l~l J1J! ~ .l:h iJJ~ .. 1'"! ,! .~! i .'~~ ..ill- a.~:l' ~l~.'! ] r- I -\ ",' Q' \ 0 ~ .... 'z 0 - -~. ::t: QC '-... QC 0 e 0 r< Clll 0 I- Z ::t: c; ~\ ~ 0 QC \ ~. W 0 -- " < Z U ::t: 0 \. ~ I ~.. "y<: @ ~J /:tt:' ',- /< /. " / . .. ). -- -7 ~ / \ ... \ \ de , c: <:: e ac:: e " ......a ...!!Oe...90..c".. "'-U O..U....c.. ~ ~ ~ -~ Q) b 0 ~ .r;;.... ~ c:=~ ~"'O;: UE~5 .52;~. "::'QJ ~ U ci E ~ t ~ ~ ~.... QI 0 c: .... bll QJ I>. ~ .;;: ..c'';:; " '" .... IS e ~ ~ .... .!:: E --5 e :) o U"'O~~~ ~ ~ g UU~""'_I>.I>. -0 \ e-'~ ~..s: ~ E nl~ ll.I ---...: ~ e ~ .. .-.- e"<>..c: ;::I QJ ::s t tl'"'O Q,l c:: .... _Q.... W 11)._ =,.c QJ....... U ~~.t:.= ~ ~.E ~ ~""O.5 c:r-s C:._ QJ E " ~; e; ,g 'Ii E""E ~ ta . 6.....o~""oO'c:c:c:: I QJ ~.~ e =-9';~ >- \..0 ~ > ... ~ u....Q.. 0 . :;;:: ~ ~ ..s ~ t 5 ~.:!l . . JL.9.~ .E ~ ~ ~ .; ~ ~~;e-5..s~5: :"TJE: ~ E o~~-€ ~ ~ ~ u g.~:g o.--s 1>.3.;;; e"'il1! 6\,5'~ -g ~ ~ Q. t '&, .. U .. ~ t-~ g.~ ca ~ QJ 5 \ o~~'I;l...c s..a.... ~~~t:::~g-~.~ '. \~:g5..c:o~_.~~ " ',,-- '" &'.u "': 1: ~..; 8 R?;.>'...'.....,y a'(t QJ] a ~Q';:: e ' ../ i t ~ ",.~ ~ oj ~ ~ . '. /. .... 5 ,~-o-; u e e 'n . . 'l:! 0() t :; c:: c:: ; >- ~ 11 .\ '" '" ....c ~ '" ~ ....._ -".. . ~ U) e U I=; a:: ._ nl = _~ _ \. ~~u"5,,-gE[ l!l "'15 ~u.~o e u 0""0 e ~ c:: ~ 11.l':;:: J u.... 5.~ 0() " :I .50.';:; .... = c: tlO_ l:: 0. cu QJ==.-c~O::l~ . ~:; e ~ f CoN II) rn \- \ ) ;...... '.' / '~ # ./ .- ~ ,:. . . .J ~ I L- " . " -'-, -I / . :::f '- \\ \ \ .\ v \ ~\ ,., i <il I D !! 0; '> ;; 'll ~ 1 ~ ~ [ ~ ~ if ~ '.w 1IIII r I ~ I ~~ ~~ ~~ U <~ o~ I ::lllS Ih ..... \ <I) $.c = ~ u = $.c ~ rLJ Q ~ ~..t - Q ~~ $.c.::: (1) ... ~ = ~~ ~"'O Q ~ <I) ~ ~ <I) u (';$ - ~ ::-J \ .\ .... .... = ~ e ..Cl ~ ~ .... .... -< ~ lL ~ ~I Hs .!lp ; ,..il eUl! CiSls (/) .IP ll.. 5i ;; I;.!! J: hI ~ . ;; E II ~ Jl ~~i ~ ~ -- a.. j ~ !.!!l ~ .J IIllj .~ ~ .. "'1: 15 CD ~ i.: {! 15 15 d :!;i! Ii. .. .. I · I ~ . ~ .. Z ~ ~ ~ cd ~ C ell ..- p.. ... ::3 (( ""0 ..- .- ::3 ~ ~ (!j v >-- o N -.:t o o N .... <l) E <l) u <l) Cl -e ~ c.. o -e -< ;:- ~ ~ !.!. w > 0: w '" ~ ili ~ w ~ ~ w .. 0: t; li> .. M < !.!. w ~~ Iii t?- .. ~ ~ ~ !.!. .. ~6 0: 8 i ~ w ~.. ~ Z "'Z w i~ w " w u u z z ~ t; I ~ :l i ~ ffi~ lIS 15:lO 0: ~ '" '" ~ is ..w .. z '!I .. 9 ~ o 1~11[1[ I '. ~",>,-' I~/:j\ . '~'.41 ~""", ~ ~ :3-, ~ r i: ~ ~'~ ". .. ... ". z. "- . .A <. _. ." ~: ;j. Z. z" ... ... ;:.. i-C 1-[ The motion passed by a vote of 5:1 with the following conditions. (Mr. Strucko voted nay.) (Mr. Craddock abstained.) 1. The grading on lot 28 will not exceed 3: 1 slopes or less and that if retaining walls are needed, they will be low in height and terraced. 2. To accept staff's recommendation to reject the planting strip waiver. The applicant presented an alternate street section that met the ordinance requirements, which the Commission recommended be reflected on the revised plan. 3. The Commission suggested the applicant consider adding additional proffer language to the Affordable Housing proffers, to address the situation if there is not a person to occupy the affordable housing that the appropriate amount would be paid to the County for affordable housing. 4. The Commission suggested the applicant consider adding additional proffer language to further address storm water management impacts of the rezoning, using a standard of 80 opposed to the 60 percent standard. Action on Public Street Waiver Reauest for ZMA-2007-00005 Avon Park II: Motion: Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to approve the waiver to allow a private street instead of a public street. This was because of the slope and the parking at the end. The motion passed by a vote of 5:1. (Mr. Strucko voted nay.) (Mr. Craddock abstained.) Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2007-00005 Avon Park II will go before the Board of Supervisors on November 14, 2007 with a recommendation for denial. Mr. Strucko left the meeting at 7:33 p.m. The Planning Commission took a 10 minute break at 7:33 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 7:44 p.m. ZMA-2007-00011 Patterson Subdivision PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 unit/acre) to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 15 dwelling units. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT-3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: Between Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Road, Lanetown Road, and Railroad Avenue. TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall (Rebecca Ragsdale) Ms. Ragsdale presented a power point presentation and summarized the staff report. · This is a request for a rezoning that was advertised for a public hearing. It does carry with it some waiver requests based on what the applicant submitted four proposed street sections. The request is to rezone 3.5 acres from R-1 to R-6. It does not come with a proffered application plan, but the applicant has submjtted a conceptual layout and provided proffers limiting the development to 14 units total, which would include 10 single family detached one-half of which would have an accessory unit with those single family detached units and 4 single family attached units proposed for a net density of 4.9 units per acres. · The main access is proposed from Lanetown Road, which the Crozet development area boundary. The rural area is on the other side of the road. It is near some proposed greenway ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 11 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 connections near the ponds at Gray Rock. There is an existing home on the property with some outbuildings and sheds. There are some evergreen trees planted along the property line adjoining Gray Rock. The proposal includes about .8 acres of open space at the end, which was proposed as a public street that would have parking on the end of it. The applicant would like to provide this as a public open space amenity. Staff has asked Parks and Rec whether they would accept that into their system. There would be 2 single family attached units adjacent to the open space. The applicant has provided for where storm water management might go, but there has not been information provided to staff in order to review it. It was shown conceptually on the Patterson property. · An exhibit was provided by the applicant that showed how the open space area was intended to be proffered. It fits in with the green infrastructure network of greenways as shown in green on the Crozet Master Plan Green Infrastructure Map. An eastern park and western park was shown on the Master Plan Infrastructure Map, but no park was shown for this area. But, the greenways are provided. · There are some outstanding issues with the proffers submitted. Some of the issues are substantive. The applicant is proffering no more than 14 units and providing for affordable housing with single family attached units as the affordable units. The intent in what was provided to staff was to exceed the 15 percent with that. The applicant would also like to provide accessory units to be associated with the single family detached units for one-half or those for 5. There are still some issues to be worked out with being clearer on what is defined with an accessory unit and what the County Code can not regulate in regards with those units. · The open space dedication was offered adjacent to Lanetown Road to provide the amenities for this development, but to also serve the neighborhood in that area. The applicant believes that there is a need for that and to also provide some trail facilities. Staff received some preliminary comments from Parks and Rec indicating that it would not be something that they could accept into their system at this point. · Comments from VDOT indicated that the Lanetown Road access should be restricted and the applicant should use Lanetown Way through Gray Rock North to get to this property. There are a number of single family homes on Lanetown Road, VDOT's desire is to get one of those driveways closed. Based on the driveway spacing they thought that was necessary. · The applicant has provided a cash proffer, which staff does not think mitigates the impacts of the development. It is for $3,000 per market rate. Staff did not have the applicant's basis for that amount for the staff report, but it does not fall within the guidelines for cash proffers. Staff notes that is an outstanding issue. There was some information provided by the applicant today, which was distributed. · Regarding waiver requests, there were 2 road sections proposed from the information provided by the applicant. One was a rural section and one was a modified urban section neither of which met the requirements. The road was proposed as public with 4 different right-of-ways. Both of them have pedestrian facilities on one side only at 4', which does meet the minimum standards for either a trail or a sidewalk. Staff could not recommend approval of the waiver requests at this time. There is no workable street section alternative proposed. Being at the conceptual stage for the rezoning it was not one that was appropriate to be entertained at the rezoning stage either. · Staff was unable to recommend approval based on the number of outstanding issues regarding proffers and cash proffers. Since the applicant is not providing a proffered plan staff feels that some of the concepts shown on the conceptual layout should be worked on to see if any of those could be incorporated as proffers in addition to the need to address the accessory units proposed. Staff does not recommend actions on the waivers at this time. Ms. Joseph asked if there were questions for Ms. Ragsdale. Mr. Morris noted that in the staff report it indicated that Parks and Rec said that the Crozet Master Plan calls for an eastern and western park and this would not fit in. He asked if there was last minute comment from them. Ms. Ragsdale replied that there was no last minute comment. They received comment that it did not fall within their criteria based on serving the larger public need. To be clear on the waivers, staff did not ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 12 recommend the applicant's street sections that were not acceptable in general. Whether they act on the waivers or not, staff does not recommend those. There being no further questions for staff, Ms. Joseph opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission. Cliff Fox, representative for the Pattersons, said that he would like to go through the items discussed in the staff report. Regarding the proposed park, Parks and Rec were actually very excited about it to begin with. It just changed in the past week. He did not know if that was in relationship to the cash proffer situation or what. Actually the proposed trail head is about 140' X 300' and it bisects 2 planned greenway systems. One goes right up through Crozet Crossings and dead ends at the railroad right-of-way. The other one is about 1,000' west of the proposed greenway park. SOCOA is very excited about having neighborhood based active recreation facilities. It helps with transportation and those types of things. There are currently 453 homes in the surrounding neighborhoods that don't have access to an active recreational facility. There is about an acre of green that has topographic issues in Wayland Grant and some others. He provided an explanation at how they were approaching the cash proffer offer. He would like the Commissioners to review that and ask questions. The affordable housing was not correctly described in the staff report. What they are trying to do is create affordable and accessible apartments in the context of 5 of the market rate residential units. He first tried to get that adopted in a PRD in Waylands Grant, which was about 5 or 6 years ago. The zoning department said that they could not figure how to figure out the density, setback regulations, etc. at that time. So it just fell out of the plan. The current Code regulation for accessory apartments is that it has to be part of the dwelling. It would be great if the County could find a way on the same lot to create an accessory apartment above a garage or something like. The affordable housing units would be right at the top fronting the greenway system or open space area. It does meet all of the criteria for everything but the highest level of SOCOA competition. It would not be a full scale high school grade field. There are so many different forms of cash proffer and affordable housing proffer language floating around. He researched some of the recently approved proffers such as Biscuit Run and NIGIC, which has an interesting definition of affordable housing, and others. They are happy to work with any of those definitions. For context before the Crozet Master Plan was developed that site was actually zoned for 75 town homes. It was essentially down zoned. So when considering land use policy and getting the most efficiency out of the growth area this site in density he believed within the Code is calculated on a gross acreage and not the net acreage. The Comp Plan and Master Plan recommends that the density be calculated on the net. This lies right in the middle of that range. Ms. Joseph invited public comment. Barbara Westbrook, resident of Crozet, had no particular problem with the subdivision per say, but with the impact on the surrounding area particularly traffic. Traffic has been her main concern with all of these subdivisions in Crozet. Most of the traffic would come down Lanetown Road and One-Half Mile Branch to get over to the either Route 250 or 1-64, which are both just small country roads. The King Vineyard, which is on One-Half Mile Branch, already is putting enough traffic on it. The neighbors are already upset. Also, traffic to get to Crozet would go down Jarman's Gap Road, which is still behind schedule for improvements. The other northern exit to get out of that area would be going north on Lanetown Road to cross the railroad at a somewhat dangerous crossing that does not have a gate that comes down when trains are coming and it is on the crest of a hill. It could be too much traffic on these small country roads. The water situation is a concern. She can't quite understand why more and more houses are being approved when right now they area having to carry 3 gallon buckets of water to water our plants in their yards. If they were so short on water she did not quite get the connection with building more houses until the water situation has improved. The field out front is on Lanetown Road. It was said that there was no other park around. But, Mint Springs Park is just right up the road. If that was turned into a park who will take care of it and where would the parking be located? Mike Benon, a Crozet resident, said that Crozet was here in force tonight for the Patterson property hearing. · He asked that the folks of Gray Rock and Gray Rock North that are here to discuss this to stand up to say that they are here and engaged in the process. Gray Rock is approximately 150 ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 13 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 homes, 26 of which are in Gray Rock North. Ms. Ragsdale outlined the situation in that area. He was a member of the Home Owner's Association Board of Directors and represents their comments tonight. They have had the opportunity to speak with the developer, Mr. Fox and Ms. Ragsdale on different occasions. They submitted written concerns that were forwarded to the Commission for review. He hoped that the Commission had those in a letter format. The Home Owner's Association requests that the Planning Commission sent a disapproval recommendation for the development of the Patterson property as it is currently proposed to the Board of Supervisors. · There are 3 areas of concern that he wanted to address: 1. The continuity with the existing neighborhoods; 2. What they believe is noncompliance with the Crozet Master Plan and the intent of the Crozet Master Plan specifically the zoning recommendation; and 3. The safety and traffic concerns on Lanetown Way. · This proposed area is referred to incorrectly in the staff report as being a Neighborhood in the Crozet Master Plan and should actually be a CT-3 Hamlet. David Ryan, Vice President of the Gray Rock Home Owner's Association, said that he also represents in addition to Mr. Benon the other residents of Gray Rock. To put the basic point out Gray Rock is not opposed to this development. They actually encourage its development. They realize that they are in a growth area and want to encourage that growth. So they are not here to oppose it necessarily. They are here to oppose the way that it has been presented and some of the ideas in that plan. The plan put forth thus far does not even meet with the county's own definition of the neighborhood areas. In fact, the applicant has come forth and requested a number of waivers yet in their own proposal does not even meet a number of the requirements in the Neighborhood Model. Without going over all of them, he did want to point out a couple in particular. The pedestrian orientation principle of the Neighborhood Model the applicant is proposing 2 alternative street sections neither of which is a workable approach. For the neighborhood friendly streets and paths new projects within the development areas are expected to have curb, gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. This is a requirement which is also being requested to be waiver. Interconnected streets and transportation networks the applicant has not provided on the concept plan and is a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is requesting that to be waived also. Regarding parks and open spaces the big plan here is that they are going to put a soccer field at the very end of it and hope that will do it. The Parks and Rec Department does not even want it. The other person who spoke questioned who is going to take care of it. They have the same concerns. The building and spaces of human scale gets to a greater sense of enclosure through the use of trees, etc. if these are provided. But, they don't even have a plan to know whether or not they are going to be provided. Regarding relegated parking, the applicant's concept plan does not demonstrate how parking will be provided. As Mr. Benon pointed out they do anticipate a considerable increase in parking and they have no idea where those cars are going to go. The only suggestion was at the end of the property near the soccer field. Regarding the site planning that respects terrain no conceptual grading plan has been provided. There are environmental and storm water management concerns, but there is not enough information on the plan for engineering comments. Regarding the streets, VDOT has concerns about the perpendicular parking proposed at this time. Regarding the cash proffers, the requirement is $17,500, but the proffer thus far has been $3,000. The basic plan is that the applicant will provide a soccer field that nobody wants. What it comes down to is that they are not opposed to the development, but their concern is that as proposed it does not meet the county's plan and are concerned with the zoning. They do not have complete information at this point to make a proper decision. Patty Hirsch, resident of Gray Rock, said that many of the concerns have been well addressed. One other concern is the impact that the proposal as it is presented might have on the lake and streams that outflow from that lake. The storm water management question is a huge one. They asked about Gray Rock North before the house was built and the land was completely done and were assured that there were adequate provisions. Really in looking back they would have to say that Gray Rock North probably has inadequate storm water management. Part of the reason for that is that a river runs through it. Part of the water runs through her yard into the lake. There is a lot of silt and red clay. The alga is increasing in the lake. Some of the residents have discussed that. It is an important resource. She felt that the way the Patterson property is so close to that water and the potential for fertilizers and such to continue to run into the lake should be considered before approval of the project. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 14 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 There being no further public comment, Ms. Joseph closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Commission. Mr. Cannon agreed with the suggestion in the staff report that the applicant might want to consider this as a work session. Ms. Ragsdale said that was staff's recommendation if the applicant would like. Staff made the applicant aware of that option. Mr. Joseph invited Mr. Fox to come forward and speak to that issue. Mr. Cannon said that it would be helpful to know which direction that they were headed if the applicant was able to make that suggestion. Mr. Fox said that the Pattersons would rather go ahead and they might ask for a deferral after they have heard some of the conversation. They think that there is a lot of stuff to be articulated, but a lot of the issues that were brought up such as the streets and storm water can be reasonably addressed. Some of the technical engineering stuff is still to be taken care of. But, he felt that he could address some of those questions. Ms. Joseph asked if he did not want this as a work session. Mr. Cannon said that he wanted to wait and see how it goes. He thought that was a hopeful expectation. Mr. Zobrist said that there were insuperable barriers to this project over getting it done. The infrastructure is way behind. The water issues are significant. The school issue is even more significant because they had to move a number of students from Crozet Elementary to Brownsville. The storm water and erosion is a problem in that area. They had a very difficult time with Mr. King because of One Half Mile Branch, which is going to take a lot of heavy traffic from that side of town. Also, Jarmans Gap Road is way behind. He looked at this as a project that they need to slow down the growth in Crozet while they figure out how to serve what has already been approved. They articulated a very strong policy in the Places29 where they asked staff to add to the Master Plan that rezoning will not be approved in an area where the infrastructure is inadequate. Mr. Morris did not support the waivers because this was just not right for this area. Mr. Craddock agreed with Mr. Zobrist and that the cash proffers are inadequate. Mr. Edgerton concurred because this was not an acceptable solution to be considered for a rezoning because of the lack of details on this project. He assumed that they were under the 90 day rule on this project. But, if this was considered an acceptable application and the clock has started ticking that it is amazing. He did not think that there was enough information for the Commission to review. Therefore, he would not be able to support the proposal under this form. Ms. Joseph said that they did not think that there was adequate infrastructure in this location. But, they did not have a problem with that in the downtown area. She said that her reasoning for supporting the proposal in downtown is that it will keep the downtown vibrant. That is extremely important. Also, they were reusing those buildings to make sure that commercial activity stayed there. They are looking at the same amount of units going in each place. If the infrastructure is inadequate for one, then it may be inadequate for the other. But, they are looking at two different sites in two different areas. She just wanted to explain her reasoning for why she could support one and not the other. She felt that infrastructure was extremely important. She agreed with Mr. Zobrist that the Commission needs to start looking at these things. She was happy to hear from the Gray Rock residents that they are saying they are not totally against this, but just don't like the form this thing is taking. It needs to be something that is more sympathetic to this particular area. She questioned if a soccer field would be allowed in R-6 zoning ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 15 district. But, she felt that the layout was definitely not sympathetic to the existing neighborhood. Therefore, she could not support the request. Mr. Zobrist felt that they need to be very careful with the urban edge. The urban edge designation in the Master Plan provides all the way from preservation to what they are looking at here. He felt that was really inconsistent if they were going to have it as a transition area. This is right on the edge. They were not going up against the railroad track. There is a huge amount of rural area right across the street. They need to be careful with the urban edge to keep the density down to where it was consistent with a transition to the rural neighborhoods out there and not let them abut right up against it. It is the same issue that they had with the Crozet Cohousing. Action on Rezonina: Motion: Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to deny ZMA-2007-000011, Patterson Subdivision, for the reasons stated in the staff report, by the Commission and staff, as outlined below. Reasons indicated by staff in report: 1. Cash proffers do not meet Board expectations. 2. The applicant has not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that has been provided. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space is proffered. 3. Affordable housing proffers must be clear on the number of affordable units proffered and use standard language. The proffer to provide accessory apartments is unclear, does not define the type of units to be provided, and does not specify mechanisms for the provision of the proposed units. Why proffers are considered inadequate, as presented by Staff at meeting: o Affordable Housing Proffer- Unclear whether the applicant intends to proffer 3 or 4 units. The affordable units are proposed as single family attached. 15% of the total number of units proposed is 2.10. o Affordable Accessory Units- Proffer unclear, accessory units proffered with half of the SFD units, a total of 5. o Open Space Dedication to the County- The applicant is proposing to proffer approximately 0.80 acres of open space, adjacent to Lanetown Road, to the County for parks and recreation purposes. This dedication is not desired by Parks & Recreation at this time. o Cash Proffers-$3,000 per market rate unit. There are 10 market rate units proposed and the Board's expectation for single family detached is $17,500 per unit to mitigate impacts of the development. The Commissioners also stated other reasons for not supporting the project in discussion, as follows: o Ms. Joseph - The proposed conceptual layout was not sympathetic to the adjoining neighborhood. o Mr. Morris - That this proposal was not right for this area. o Mr. Edgerton - The applicant did not provide acceptable submittal materials. o Mr. Zobrist - There were insuperable barriers to this project over getting it done. The infrastructure is way behind. The water issues are significant. The school issue is even more significant because they had to move a number of students from Crozet Elementary to Brownsville. The storm water and erosion is a problem in that area. There were concerns about the density of the project at this location in Crozet. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2007-00011, Patterson Subdivision, will go before the Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2007 with a recommendation for denial. Action on Waivers: ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 16 Motion: Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to deny the waivers for ZMA-2007-000011, Patterson Subdivision for the following reasons. · The waivers were not recommended for approval because staff did not find justification in granting variations from the subdivision ordinance required street sections for curb, gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. · The applicant also did not provide enough detail to approve any modifications to standards. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.) Mr. Cilimberg pointed out for the record that a member of the public spoke about the Master Plan designation and it is a Hamlet. The maximum number of units under the plan would be 13 because they could not exercise the bonus provision under the Hamlet. So they are correct there is one more unit proposed here than would be the maximum under a Hamlet designation for this particular CT. Old Business Ms. Joseph asked if there was any old business. · Rivanna Village Master Plan Public Participation (Lee Catlin) Lee Catlin, Community Relations Manager, followed up on the Commission's prior discussion on the Rivanna Master Plan citizen participation. She responded to the question as to how they have gotten to where we are in the process that they are using for the Rivanna Master Plan in a Power Point Presentation. (See the attached copy of Power Point Presentation) · In reading the Master Plan section of the Comp Plan it is certainly understandable that someone could think that a selected committee would be used. There is some openness to the language that does allow for some different interpretations and expectations. Staff thinks that it is very important and valuable for us to have this kind of a clarifying discussion. They do think that the approach that they are using right now does fulfill the intent and the general direction of the Comprehensive Plan and follows the instruction that is laid out in Step 2. · Step 2 says to assemble a group of residents, property owners, County officials, community leaders, developers and lenders who will develop the Master Plan based on the vision of the community. Although the Comp Plan does go on to mention the work committee a number of times in her reading she did not see at any point where it specifies a particular size or limits the level of participation in this group or committee. Their interpretation of the intent of the Comp Plan direction is to mean assembling a broad and inclusive group that allows all diverse perspectives and opinions to be heard and considered in the process, creating fair and equitable opportunity for involvement. · She explained the process and approaches used for the Crozet Master Plan, Places29 and Pan tops Master Plan. The approach that they have been using so far has been shared with and endorsed by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors on a number of occasions. It has been the accepted process for the first 3 plans that they have worked on with some important adaptations, which will be discussed. · In addition to this, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, who as the consultant for this project has been meeting with interested citizens throughout the process, did not support the steering committee concept that was different from the standard consistent approach that they have used to date. Harrison Rue from T JPDC is present tonight. He will be happy to answer questions and can elaborate on that. The bottom line that he related to staff was that in working with a number of these types of plans the self selected steering committees are not effective in bringing all voices equitably into the process. The self selected steering committees elevated the most dominate voices. They really run into difficulty according to his experience with establishing a group that attempts to speak for the community when in fact that the community holds a variety of perspectives that are not necessarily in agreement with each other. · Although they feel that they are following the guidance of and meeting the intent of the Comp ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 16, 2007 17 DRAFT ACTION MEMO - SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION 12407 . . . / f COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012 November 9,2007 Weather Hill Development c/o Frank Pohl 703 East Jefferson Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ZMA2007-00014 Liberty Hall Amendment (Signs # 36 & 39) Tax Map 56, Parcels 97A, 97Al, 97 Dear Mr. Pohl: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on October 30,2007, recommended approval by a vote of7:0. ZMA2007-00014 Liberty Hall Amendment, to include the additional proffer language to the Board of Supervisors Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on December 12,2007. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296-5832. Sincerely, f~.~ M-/a)J Rebecca Ra~""'t.' Planner Planning Division RR/SM . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: STAFF: ZMA 2007-14 Liberty Hall REBECCA RAGSDALE SUBJECT/PROPOSAUREQUEST: AGENDA DATE: Liberty Hall is a request to amend proffers approved December 12, 2007 with ZMA 2005-005, a rezoning of 8.01 acres from R-1 to Neighborhood Model for residential and live work units. ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CO NT ACT(S): CONSENT AGENDA: Cilimberg, Ragsdale ACTION: INFORMATION: LEGAL REVIEW: YES ATTACHMENTS: YES OWNER/APPLICANT: Weatherhill Development (Frank Pohl) BACKGROUND: A public hearing was held on this rezoning at the Planning Commission on October 30,2007. The Commission recommended approval of the rezoning to the Board of Supervisors. This motion for approval was conditioned upon the applicant revising affordable housing proffers to include the option to offer cash, in the event that the County prefers cash to a housing unit at the time of site plan approval because a potential buyer has not been found. This has become standard proffer language for affordable housing. DISCUSSION/FINDINGS: The applicant submitted revised proffers following the Planning Commission meeting, which satisfactorily address the condition included in the Commission's recommendation of approval for the rezoning to amend proffers. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA 07-14 inclusive of the amended proffers dated November 21, 2007 (Attachment I) ATTACHMENTS: I. Amended Proffer Form, ZMA 2007-14 Liberty Hall, dated 11/21/07 2Ml\ 2007.14 Liberty Hail Proffer Amendment 80S 12.1:2-07 Attachment I . Original Proffer _ Amended Proffer X AMENDED PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: I 1/ ZI /2007 ZMA #2007-00014 Tax Map Parcels: 56-97A; 56-97AI 8.01 Acres to be rezoned from NMD (Neighborhood Model District) with Proffers rZMA 2005-00051 to NMD (Neighborhood Model District) with Amended Proffers Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable. . 1. The Owner shall contribute $137,600 ($3,200 per unit for 43 units) cash to the County's capital improvement program for the purpose of mitigating impacts from this development. The cash contribution shall be used for transportation improvements (i.e. Eastern Avenue), schools, libraries, fire and rescue, parks or any other public use serving the Community of Crozet as identified in the Crozet Master Plan. Contributions shall be payable under one of the following methods, which shall be designated by the County: (1) ninety (90) days after receipt of written notice by the Owner from the County identifying a Capital Improvement Project within the Community of Crozet for which the cash would be applied, provided that contributions for a Capital Improvement Project shall not exceed $50,000 during any sixty (60) day period and said request is after the County's approval of the first final site plan or subdivision plat within the Project, or (2) in increments of $3,200 cash per lot, for any market-rate townhouse or new detached single family dwelling unit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for any improvement thereon. If the cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within (10) ten years from the date of the County's receipt of the final contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to a project(s) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program for the Community of Crozet. 2. A. The Owner shall provide eight (8) units of affordable housing for lease or sale as identified on the General Development Plan produced by Timmons Group, dated August 15, 2005 and last revised April 6, 2006, entitled "Application Plan - Figure 2". The eight (8) units shall be comprised of one or more of the following unit types: single-family attached housing (townhouses), condominiums or apartmentslflats for rental. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the eight (8) equivalent affordable units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below. The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the subject property. The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median income, such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PIT!) do not exceed 30% ofthe gross household income. 1. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale affordable units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The Owner/Builder shall . Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLe. Page 1 provide the County or its designee a period of 180 days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the affordable units. The I80-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser(s). If these units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each ofthe eight (8) units. 11. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The gross lease amount, including tenant paid utilities, shall not exceed one-hundred twenty (120%) percent of the fair market value of rentals published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development that is in effect when the unites) is available for occupancy. In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent affordable units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph 1 b(i) shall apply for a period of ten (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent affordable unit, or until the units are sold as low or moderate cost units qualifying as such under either the Virginia Housing Development Authority, Farmers Home Administration, or Housing and Urban Development, Section 8, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). 2. Conveyance of Interest - All deeds conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph 1. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph 5B. At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph 1 b(ii) have been satisfied. 3. Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-cunent owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-cunent Owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. B. County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the County's Housing Office informs the then-cunent owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-cunent owner/builder expects the units to be Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLC. Page 2 . . . completed, and that the County will instead accept a cash contribution to the County to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unit(s), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unit(s) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then-current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unit(s) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale. 3. Within 30 days after VDOT determines that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of Radford Lane and Route 250 or at the intersection of Eastern Avenue and Route 250, the Owner shall make a cash contribution to the County to pay for its share of the cost to install a traffic signal by others. The Owner's cash contribution shall be based upon the traffic volume generated by this site at the intersection, as compared to the total traffic volume at the intersection creating the need for the traffic signal, as determined by VDOT, Albemarle County, or the Owner's traffic consultant with the review and approval by VDOT and Albemarle County, and be determined by Albemarle County using an equitable method for determining the Owner's pro-rata share of the cost. This proffer shall be in effect until December 31, 2013. 4. The Owner shall dedicate and convey to Albemarle County, prior to the first final site plan approval, a 10-ft wide access easement to accommodate the construction, maintenance, and use of a Class B primitive trail connecting a sidewalk at the northern end of "Road D" to the property line adjacent the 20' sewer easement on TMP 56-97 as shown on the General Development Plan. The access easement shall be shown on the subdivision plat or site plan for the underlying or adjacent lands within the Project and constructed by Owner in conjunction with the improvements for that subdivision plat or site plan. The primitive trail shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the standards identified in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix A - Greenway Plan. If the primitive trail access easement is not dedicated as part of a subdivision plat, the Owner shall pay all costs of surveying and preparing legal documents in a form acceptable to the County Attorney necessary to dedicate the easement. 5. Overlot grading Plan - Plats: The Owner shall submit an over-lot grading plan (hereinafter the "Plan") meeting the requirements of Proffer 5 with the application for each subdivision of the Property into single family detached lots and single family attached dwelling units shown on the General Development Plan. The Plan shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the site plan or subdivision plat. The Property within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer has determined the lot grading is not consistent with the approved grading Plan. The Plan shall satisfy the following: A. The Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, setbacks, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer. B. The Plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. C. All proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet. All concentrated surface drainage over lots shall be clearly shown with the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be designed to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from the flooding of dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails. D. Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient of three (3) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3: 1). Steeper Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLe. Page 3 slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two (2) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2:1), unless the County Engineer finds that the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. E. Surface drainage may flow across up to three (3) lots before being collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way outside of the lots. F. No surface drainage across a residential lot shall have more than one-half (1/2) acre of land draining to it. G. All drainage from streets shall be carried across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site. H. The Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if it is less than (10) feet, from the portion of the structure facing the street, has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adjacent to possible entrances to dwellings that will not be served by a stairway. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. I. Any requirement of this proffer may be waived by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual Plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries ofthe property; (iv) topography ofthe property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be waived to at least an equivalent degree. In approving a waiver, the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition would not forward the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the Project, and to the land adjacent thereto. J. The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. All amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. K. In the event that the County adopts overlot grading regulations after the date ZMA 2005-00005 is approved, any requirement of those regulations that is less restrictive than any requirement of Proffer 5 shall supersede the cOlTesponding requirement of this paragraph, subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Community Development. Signature of Owner: ....} ..' /' //1'~1 Marc C. Powell, Manager Weather Hill Development, LLC Date: / / / z. ( , 2007 I Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLC. Page 4 . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2007-14 Liberty Hall SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Liberty Hall is a request to amend proffers approved with ZMA 2005-005, a rezoning of 8.01 acres from R-1 to Neighborhood Model for residential and live work units. STAFF: REBECCA RAGSDALE PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: October 30, 2007 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE: December 12, 2007 OWNER/APPLICANT: Weatherhill Development (Frank Pohl) PETITION: PROJECT: ZMA 2007-00014 Liberty Hall Amendment PROPOSAL: Rezone 8.01 acres from NMD Neighborhood Model District - residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses) to NMD Neighborhood Model District - residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses to amend the proffers to allow for for-lease affordable housing for approved units, No additional dwelling units are proposed. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Crozet Master Plan designates the property CT3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses, and CT4 Urban General: residential (net 4.5 units/acre single family, net 12 units/acre townhouses/apartments, net 18 units/acre mixed use) with supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and mixed uses including retail/office ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: Tax Map 56, Parcels 97 A, 97 A 1, and 97 (only a .833 acre southwest portion of the property as shown on the General Development Plan) along Radford Lane near its intersection with Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt. 250 W) [Location Map-Attachment Ai MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall BACKGROUND: The rezoning to Neighborhood Model District (NMD) for Liberty Hall (ZMA 2005-05) was approved in June 2006, allowing 51 residential units, including 8 live/work units, 16 single family detached, 19 townhouses, and 8 multifamily units. (Attachment B-Approval Letter & Proffers) The 8 multifamily units (Units 1, 2, 12, 13, 10, 11, 21, and 22 as shown on the application plan) were proffered as for- sale affordable housing units. (Attachment D-Application Plan) Since the rezoning approval, a final site plan (SDP 2006-102) was approved for development of the property in June 2007. The applicant has now submitted a rezoning application to amend the proffers for the project to include the option of allowing the affordable units for-lease and the applicant believes this flexibility will benefit affordable housing. The applicant has also amer<ded the proffer to allow single family ZMA 2001'-14 Liberty Hall Proffer Amendment PC 10-30-07 Public Heanng attached/townhouses as an affordable unit type as well. No other changes are requested to the plan or proffers. DISCUSSION/FINDINGS: The applicant overlooked the potential to provide for-lease affordable units with the rezoning for Liberty Hall. Typically, proffers approved with residential rezonings allow for this flexibility in allowing the affordable units as either for-sale or for-rent to insure variety/choice in housing. The Housing Director has no objection to this request. The amended proffers are provided as Attachment C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA 07-14 with the amended proffers. (Attachment C) ATTACHMENTS: A. Location Map B. ZMA 2005-05 Liberty Hall Approval Letter and Proffers C. Amended Proffer Form dated October 3, 2007 . D. ZMA 2005-005 Liberty Hall Application Plan ZMA 2007-14 Llbeny Hall Proffer Amendment PC 10-30-07 Public Heating 2 Attachment A ~ I i ~ i ~ " ~ Ii I~ Ilfl I ~J If] i J f I J ~ II OJ I I 0 I I. [ ] 0 ) I I J Ii! i 111 ... d I Iii f 1)1" ~'l J J i I I I i J ... .... I i ~ . f j J ; f ). - I ~ I ~ J j ..rn B .~ ~ ~ <nG.. ~~l~ ~~!~ "'~ ~~ ~ ~:!. $ <::1z < - = ~ 5 .c ~ e'IS - - 0. ~ " ~ 0. E g <.> ~ i. ~~ 'I') ~ In ~ J! o:r 1 I ... o I ::c :R ~ I I ... o I II.. lR ... ~ o ... I \0 II) ~ o ~~ :R"I. . ~ ~ . G ~ is. ~ . ~ i; .e . 0. . :; . Attachment B COUNTYOFALBE~E Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Fax (434) 972-4012 . . Phone (434)296-5832 June 28, 2006 Frank Pohl Weather Hill Homes 703 E. Jefferson St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ZMA 2005-00005 Liberty Hall (Cross Property) - Sign # 69 Tax Map 56, Parcels 97 A, 97 A 1, and 97 (portion of) Dear Mr. Pohl: The Board of Supervisors approved your rezoning application on June 14, 2006. Your rezoning from R1 (1 unit/acre) Residential to NMD Neighborhood Model District - residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses was approved in accordance with the Code of Development dated April 6,2006 and the attached proffers dated May 31, 2006. An application plan/plan of development dated April 6, 2006 was approved as part of the rezoning. Please refer to these documents for any future applications and requests on this property. Please be advised that although the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors took action on the project noted above, no uses on the property as approved above may lawfully begin until all applicable approvals have been received and conditions have been met. This includes: . compliance with applicable PROFFERS; . compliance with requirements of the CODE OF DEVELOPMENT; . approval of and compliance with an approved SITE PLAN and/or SUBDIVISION; and . approval of a ZONING COMPLIANCE CLEARANCE. If you have questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact Sherri Proctor at 296-5832. Sincerely, ~ y ~t;~e(?-- Director of Planning VWC/aer Cc: Coble, Edsel Max & J Arlene Coble Trustees of the Coble Living Trust 682 Radford Lane, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Cross, Robert AI & Jeanne Kerr Cross (Coble Living Trust) 610 Radford Lane, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Amelia McCulley Tex Weaver Chuck proctor Steve Allshouse Sherri Proctor Sarah Baldwin Bruce Woodzell (Real Estate) Pohl Page 2 of2 June 28, 2006 . Original Proffer X PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: 5/31/2006 ZMA #2005-00005 Tax Map Parcels: 56-97 A: 56-97 A 1, portion of 56-97 8.377 Acres to be rezoned from RI to NMD (Neighborhood Model District) in accordance 'with the General Development Plan dated April 6, 2006 Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby vohmtarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered Plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning request. . 1) The Owner shall contribute $137,600 ($3,200 per llilit for 43 units) cash to the County's capital improvement program for the purpose of mitigating impacts from this development. The cash contribution shall be used for transportation improvements (i.e. Eastem Avenue), schools, libraries, fire and rescue, parks or any other public use serving the Community of Crozet as identified in the Crozet Master Plan. Contributions shall be payable under one of the following methods, which shall be designated by the County: (1) ninety (90) days after receipt of written notice by the Owner from the County identifying a Capital Improvement Project 'within the Community of Crozet for which the cash would be applied, provided that contributions for a Capital Improvement Project shall not exceed $50,000 during any sixty (60) day period and said request is after the County's approval of the first final site plan or subdivision plat within the Project, or (2) in increments of $3,200 cash per lot, for any market-rate townhouse or new detached single family dwelling illlit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for any improvement thereon. If the cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within (10) ten years from the date of the County's receipt of the final contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to a project(s) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program for the Community of Crozet. 2) The Owner shall provide eight (8) lmits of affordable housing as identified on the General Development Plan produced by Tinlmons Group, dated August 15, 2005 and last revised April 6, 2006, entitled "Application Plan _ Figure 2". The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the subject property. The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median income, such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the gross household income. All purchasers of these units shall be approved by the Albemarle COlmty Office of Housing or its designee. The Owner/Builder shall provide the County or its designee a period of 180 days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the affordable units. The 180-day period shall COlllillence upon written notice from the Owner that the units v,rill be available for sale. This notice shall notbe given more than 120 days prior to anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser. This proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each of tl;e eight (8) units, 3) Witllin 30 days after VDOT determines that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of Radford Lane and Route 250 or at the intersection of Eastem A venue and Route 250, the Owner shall make a cash contribution to . Proffer Fonn Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLe. Page 1 the County to pay for its share of the cost to install a traffic signal by others. The Ovmer's cash contribution shall be based upon the traffic volume generated by this site at the intersection, as compared to the total traffic volume at the intersection creating the need for the traffic signal, as determined by VDOT, Albemarle Cotmty, or the Owner's traffic consultant with the review and approval by VDOT and Albemarle Count)', and be detemlined by Albemarle County using an equitable method for determining the Owner's pro-rata share of the cost. This proffer shall be in effect until December 3 1, 2013. 4) The Owner shall dedicate and convey to Albemarle County, prior to the first final site plan approval, a lO-ft wide access easement to accommodate the construction, maintenance, and use of a Class B primitive trail connecting a sidewalk at the northem end of "Road D" to the property line adj acent the 20' sewer easement on TMP 56-97 as shovm on the General Development Plan. The access easement shall be shown on the subdivision plat or site plan for the underlying or adjacent lands within the Project and constructed by Owner in conjunction \vith the improvements for that subdivision plat or site plan. The primitive trail shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the standards identified in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix A _ Greenway Plan. If tile primitive trail access easement is not dedicated as part of a subdivision plat, the Owner shall pay all costs of surveying and preparing legal documents in a form acceptable to the County Attomey necessary to dedicate the easement. 5) Overlot grading Plan _ Plats: The Owner shall submit an over-lot grading plan (hereinafter the "Plan") meeting the requirements of Proffer 5 \'lith the application for each subdivision of the Property into single familv detached lots and single family attached dwelling units shown on the General Development Plan. The Pla~l shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the site plan or subdivision plat. The Property 'within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on tile approved Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the COlUlty Engineer has detennined the lot grading is not consistent \vith tile approved grading Plan. The Plan shall satisfy tile following: a) The Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, setbacks, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the COlUIty Engineer detennines are needed to verify that tile Plan satisfies the requirements oftilis proffer. b) The Plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater tilan one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. c) All proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet. All concentrated surface drainage over lots shall be clearly shown with the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be designed to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from the flooding of dwellings in the event a stonn sevver fails. d) Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient oftilIee (3) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3:1). Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two (2) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2: 1), unless tile County Engineer fmds tilat the grading recOlmnendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. e) Surface drainage may flow across up to three (3) lots before being collected in a stonn seVier or directed to a drainage viay outside of the lots. f) No surface drainage across a residential lot shall have more than one-half (1/2) acre of land draining to it. g) All drainage from streets shall be carried across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of tile building site. Proffer F mID Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, Uc. Page 2 . . . h) The Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if it is less than (10) feet, from the portion of the stmcture facing the street, has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adj acent to possible entrances to dwellings that will not be served by a stairw av. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. i) Any requirement of this .proffer may be waived by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual Plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance detemlined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams. stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of street~ and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be waived to at least an equivalent degree. In approving a waiver, the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition vvould 110t forward the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or othenvise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development ofthe Project, and to the land adjacent thereto. j) The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. All amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. k) In the event that the County adopts overlot grading regulations after the date ZMA 2005-00005 is approved, any requirement of those regulations that is less restrictive than any requirement of Proffer 5 shall supersede the corresponding requirement of this paragraph, subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Community Development. Signature of Owner: _./1 d ---- 1/- ~ Marc C. Powell, Managing Member Weather Hill Development, LLC Contract Purchaser and Agent for Robert L. Cross and Jeanne Kerr Cross, current Owners Date: May 31,2006 Proffer FOlm Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, Uc. Page 3 . . . Attachment C Original Proffer _ Amended Proffer X AMENDED PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature:A.'i/.3/2007 ZMA #TBA Tax Map Parcels: 56-97A; 56-97A1 8.01 Acres to be rezoned from NMD (Neighborhood Model District) with Proffers [ZMA 2005-00051 to NMD (Neighborhood Model District) with Amended Proffers Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable. 1) The Owner shall contribute $137,600 ($3,200 per unit for 43 units) cash to the County's capital improvement program for the purpose of mitigating impacts from this development. The cash contribution shall be used for transportation improvements (i.e. Eastern Avenue), schools, libraries, fire and rescue, parks or any other public use serving the Community of Crozet as identified in the Crozet Master Plan. Contributions shall be payable under one of the following methods, which shall be designated by the County: (1) ninety (90) days after receipt of written notice by the Owner from the County identifying a Capital Improvement Project within the Community of Crozet for which the cash would be applied, provided that contributions for a Capital Improvement Project shall not exceed $50,000 during any sixty (60) day period and said request is after the County's approval of the first final site plan or subdivision plat within the Project, or (2) in increments of $3,200 cash per lot, for any market-rate townhouse or new detached single family dwelling unit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for any improvement thereon. If the cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within (10) ten years from the date of the County's receipt of the final contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to a project(s) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program for the Community of Crozet. 2) The Owner shall provide eight (8) units of affordable housing for lease or sale as identified on the General Development Plan produced by Timmons Group, dated August 15, 2005 and last revised April 6, 2006, entitled "Application Plan - Figure 2". The eight (8) units shall be comprised of one or more of the following unit types: single-family attached housing (townhouses), condominiums or apartmentslflats for rental. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the eight (8) equivalent affordable units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below. The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the subject property. The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median income, such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the gross household income. a) For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale affordable units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The Owner/Builder shall provide the County or its designee a period of 180 days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the affordable units. The 180-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLe. Page 1 qualified purchaser during this period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser(s). If these units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each of the eight (8) units. b) For-Rent Affordable Units (i) Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The gross lease amount, including tenant paid utilities, shall not exceed one-hundred twenty (120%) percent of the fair market value of rentals published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development that is in effect when the unites) is available for occupancy. In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent affordable units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph 1 b(i) shall apply for a period of ten (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent affordable unit, or until the units are sold as low or moderate cost units qualifying as such under either the Virginia Housing Development Authority, Farmers Home Administration, or Housing and Urban Development, Section 8, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). (ii) Conveyance of Interest - All deeds conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph 1. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for- rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and . full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph 5B. At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph 1 b(ii) have been satisfied. (iii)Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current Owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. 3) Within 30 days after VDOT determines that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of Radford Lane and Route 250 or at the intersection of Eastern Avenue and Route 250, the Owner shall make a cash contribution to the County to pay for its share of the cost to install a traffic signal by others. The Owner's cash contribution shall be based upon the traffic volume generated by this site at the intersection, as compared to the total traffic volume at the intersection creating the need for the traffic signal, as determined by VDOT, Albemarle County, or the Owner's traffic consultant with the review and approval by VDOT and Albemarle County, and be determined by Albemarle County using an equitable method for determining the Owner's pro-rata share of the cost. This proffer shall be in effect until December 31, 2013. 4) The Owner shall dedicate and convey to Albemarle County, prior to the first final site plan approval, a IO-ft wide access easement to accommodate the construction, maintenance, and use of a Class B primitive trail Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development. LLe. Page 2 . . . connecting a sidewalk at the northern end of "Road D" to the property line adjacent the 20' sewer easement on TMP 56-97 as shown on the General Development Plan. The access easement shall be shown on the subdivision plat or site plan for the underlying or adjacent lands within the Project and constructed by Owner in conjunction with the improvements for that subdivision plat or site plan. The primitive trail shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the standards identified in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix A - Greenway Plan. If the primitive trail access easement is not dedicated as part of a subdivision plat, the Owner shall pay all costs of surveying and preparing legal documents in a form acceptable to the County Attorney necessary to dedicate the easement. 5) Overlot grading Plan - Plats: The Owner shall submit an over-lot grading plan (hereinafter the "Plan") meeting the requirements of Proffer 5 with the application for each subdivision of the Property into single family detached lots and single family attached dwelling units shown on the General Development Plan. The Plan shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the site plan or subdivision plat. The Property within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer has determined the lot grading is not consistent with the approved grading Plan. The Plan shall satisfy the following: a) The Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, setbacks, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements ofthis proffer. b) The Plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. c) All proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet. All concentrated surface drainage over lots shall be clearly shown with the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be designed to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from the flooding of dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails. d) Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient of three (3) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3: 1). Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two (2) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2:1), unless the County Engineer finds that the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. e) Surface drainage may flow across up to three (3) lots before being collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way outside of the lots. t) No surface drainage across a residential lot shall have more than one-half (1/2) acre of land draining to it. g) All drainage from streets shall be carried across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site. h) The Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if it is less than (10) feet, from the portion of the structure facing the street, has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adjacent to possible entrances to dwellings that will not be served by a stairway. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. i) Any requirement of this proffer may be waived by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual Plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLC. Page 3 boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be waived to at least an equivalent degree. In approving a waiver, the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition would not forward the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the Project, and to the land adjacent thereto. j) The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. All amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. k) In the event that the County adopts overlot grading regulations after the date ZMA 2005-00005 is approved, any requirement of those regulations that is less restrictive than any requirement of Proffer 5 shall supersede the corresponding requirement of this paragraph, subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Community Development. Signature of Owner: //~J /1yV~ Marc C. Powell, Managing Member Weather Hill Development, LLC Date: tfJq 3 , 2007 Amended Proffer Form Liberty Hall Weather Hill Development, LLC Page 4 ~ - ...I = ~ 6 .c y ...I = - ~ w III 1-1 ...I I r; ~ '6 % ~ ~ ~ ) Wd!;!;IC:!J - 9002 .8 c:: :2Q' ~::t '- <: 0.--..:. Q..~ ~ ,~ t::nJ:::; c:: lI} '2: Ci ~m cc:~ .c::t c::"O ::J 0 82 L.; <IJ 0 1::..Q ~"& E '_ <IJ <IJ ..Q<: -.; q: c:: '0::( In o ....... In .... ....... ClO L 111..1~1~~~lil'iIIIITiT ~~mmi3!3~~l:i1l:i1l:i1 l:i1ezez",,,, __ . r--- - I ...... ~ ~ ... 2 ~ '" '" ~ 2 2 212 '" '" N -- 6 ~ b 6 6 616 6 6 g I I , 90 JdV 6uluoza.....,6Mp\28699'..O-v \I~ '6Mp'^m2B699\ Cl3^O:J :awoN :j..no,.(ul E 8 '" lJ ClI ::l ;g ~ ~~~ &<J~:E~ o~~al<: ~o:s~~ ClI l!! '\l!lI Q~~~i :;;; ClI :0; e :x: ...... ID IL: " ~ ~ ~.. M :Eu:il::'iil<: :ll""~ea :tRullJ ~ lIill.i 5~ E vi' '" E .s o 1::::::: ~~\l!lIa ....,"''<>~:t:: l/'J~:::;::;8 1:>.<: ''''8l/'J "'~~~tl..: ~~?!;S;13~ UlClliil"<tl/'Jtl <: ...... :Ei " '. '" o II~ Q cu 0::::: oI.;j e-l::15tl1<: E:S~~~8 I:::cou_ ~~~\~ I ~ ~ --~ ~~ N~a~~aw~~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~~ \ ~ ; JP~ if__ ~ I I~ ~ "'~~ ~Iii O~ <:~ -.I~ ~~ l1.i!;g m~ ~I...; lli !;g t3 a5 r-l u ~ ~ ~ ~ g e .... ~ c.CI)N 8.-. ~ b ~n ~iflo cu~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g] I-i U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ oc: ~ 'O'd W'dV:J~'dro / ~~. ~ ~ ~. -j\.~'ll l'Jy.y.~ I~ .... ~ ~ ~ - - r CZl Cl) rJ> ;::> ] ....:ll 1~[lJl~08~ &LO~ 1O"":.....~Cli :;l I: ~ ~ ~ cq ~ ..- 15 ~ _CIlCll.... .... .QUI COlQ~t--: ,:l<'1C'l dooe") ....0 --, 0 IIJ!I~8 ooo~ I l.i <<loT'" .. $:: L ~ ~ .....0 08~!; .. t.1C'\fQ ~jciOO a.. coo -.. 0 2g8g' !- il:~~ ~~~~ :a fIj......N u j . ~t;;; ~ l!\ l:! ~ ! ! Jlci~ 0000 " 1-, ~~~ ~&&i I ~cd'N 'lltC'1(f) ;g' 'IOCO ::t;t:!~ en :l;;~ r;iooo - 0 lilgo08 ~~~gj--:~!i{~- i .. ",- -...:'!! co .... '" c.o~coo ct) 'NCDzr;~t::~ ~ ~ -r: . 0 0..... I ~;: : .,10 ! ~ Jl cD 'I' ] 0 88~~ iE ~~~ ddoo ~ >. ~8 ~oo~ & =j .o~o aO ~ : I~;! I. ::l18 ~ ~ j i ~ ~ ~ dId'" 0 ~ Ii ~:"'~ ~!}i ~ 7121<<; ~;1jI~;;l! 1 ~ ~I~ :ii~. ~~~.....~ :ri....:m 1'1 i~ ,....co......'" ~ "0 :J ~ ~ ~, I~ ~ ..: ~ ~ ~~ ~ J Ll:ttttl~1. ~ ~ u:i Cl: f2 ~ lli :s ll: , ~ ~ ;:j o :x: \:l ~ ~ ..; I 0- cto :I:~ ~~ ~ Z~ I~<( uU ~(/) > UJ .... .... ~ w o ~ ~~ Ii: o ~ ~o:::: w Z I- 0"- ~ ~ Vl <Co r-"\ ffl fi:l:ilil' 51 ffi ~ w~ ~ ~ ~w .. "- W .._ I- 0 wO~ u ~ Z ~~ ~..~ ~ E 3 3 ~ - ~w3 Z ~ 0 o ~~ ~o::::Oo ~ u z o ~ .. I- "-0 ~ ~ ZLjS UJu.o z ~ O~~m~~ - ~Z~ ~ ~~OO~5~ ~ w~~ '" ~ -~~6z - ~""3 ~ ~~~~w~ ~ ~~~Z ~ wZ"'~~1- ~ ~ ~w...~~ o w:"iz-J,iIi ~ww __~ 5 ~~~~~~~E~s ~~~~ - 1l.3zo~...,~z~ui Z w.....w w ~~u~ll.Wow ~.. ~ ~~Wl-~~w~ Z j ~~~~ ~ ~:"io~3~w~~~ 1L>2~~~ Z w~~w5!1-~wOb ~Xo~~w o %O~~o"-~w~~ ZILI->O% u W9~w~~ffi~~~~S~~~~~ ~~ ~"-~:ilfi:lZ~~~~~~~~~20 ~ZZ~~~U~:"i~zw~w~o~~o~ ~o~ %0 ~"-~Wll. Z~ILRz~~ ~~i~~~~~fi:lwffi:il~~~~~~~~m o~Z~2@:ilW~~~IL~~~~~~~~~ $~o~~~""~:"ill.~~~~~Z3~~w~ w~~~~~~~~iIiW3~~il'~~~~~~ffi ~~~~~~il'~ooffi~~~~Z~~~~j~ I ~~~~~o~~~!~::!~tj~"-8~ ~ ....(/)0A. ......... Z CJ. UJ --, 1-......... A. I- .... I I~ I I I I I ~ <C (I) ~Q:lili !z ~ r-- - ~11r I ~ I I! I I! I! II~ :: ! ~ ~ ~ 11 i.. j h hh:ij~~ i "."ll j~h l'd~ 1 "IS 1~1S IS] Iii i ~ ~ + . L~~7lllll t 1 I>; '"" e- 1 i J r- i f i ..1 , ~ l 1 1 J.! ! ,,"J; ~ ~ ~ it ~I + ;~-e- <-: t j 11 ~I.. < · I' ] t · If ..... .~ !; I II ll! i I h .!l 1 < q I l I I H ~ g ~ ~ ~ " "l 11 · _ i I II ::; I - ~ . l' l ~! I, r- ~i ~ ~ ~:!l ~ ~ 'll ;~1l ~ .. .3 ~ H; ; I i H ! ~ in. 1.11 c c c ~ ~!I L ,~ , ..", Ii f il . ~l I - if I h f1 ~~I 1 ~~~ ~ fa) r~ ! 1 1 r- r- l1 I .3.'1 r-~ ~ ~ IlJ U lu 1 -.. ~I . I I J ~~ H&l "'~ (I) t- Z w I- Z o U u. o W ....I m CC t- o ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~I I ';'1 LJ ~ ~ !Z ~ z ~ I III I I rn ::l o~ '0 co l: C>~ II) .5 ~ )( ::2 e.-- ~ .::; III 1II C> r- E l!! _ :::l ~ ~ EO coo 'xo -8-.r-.r III ._ ::iii :l a::: :Q - .... .c C> 'CD .c C> l: :2 il ~ I ~ p.. .~ -a ::: QJ El r-rn ~ .~ ..9 0 ~ Ui Cl), '0 0, lii .Q E ~ l: ~ E l: :::J -8 E 'w 'x III III a::: ~ L .>< lii g~ lII::i I III rn III III III ::l LO~ cc:c -g l"l l: )( ~ ~ CI) -::I f- jg ~ C LOLOLO -8 ~ ~ l"l l"l l"l 'w III a::: - III rn ::l III -g l"l C .~ ::E - LO l"l . N 'or-C'\I("')VI.l)U) L .I.. ILL J --, I I I I (QCU~ c: C I:: - ~~~ - l"lll:!l"l N - w.... ._~-::::::-..::: . . '~I'UO' 0' p."",,, .':: .\::~oP p.,.".... p 'OUlPPIQ uan d ~t.l\FIlI. -"'l . UOII''"''UO' "/P~';.,WWI! ,. 'I'.do' N . .4) ,n.4'" ,~,.:u ,.w PUD ""'"0 .... ,-- -'":-;: . ---.. , - ... .... ~ . - .-- ,. - ~ .. .... - .:"-. .. .- - It> In .... NM ~ z jO I\i~ ~i ~ w ~S z Uo ~- O u ~ 1Il Ul ~ M o j ~~~~ g~ ~ ~ ::> ~ j:: ~ l'iJ ": -l :z ~I-<(~ O:I: W:I: - ~ 0 _ ~ :I: 9 ~ !;;: ~Hd;;:~1J~~ W -':I:Ouc(l-a:ozu ....W:.-u ~W::Jo Um iri~~~ffi~:I:~~SE <Czo"'ILJWz llll::;:;:O aJ:~~~~~~~~~~ <( 0 <(:;: . ~ W ~ <( ::J 0 U ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ :;: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ :I: ~ 5 ~ <( ro . x ~ ~ l/'J '" Z :;: <( U c:J w Z -' ~ ~ ~ z - ... ... -- <( <('<>00<( ... o~\O:.::;~ W ... 00 ~ ~ :. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Uil~LI~l~l~ L N - L-, ~ ......... Ul :E w tn --:-- (;; (/) 19 w 0- Z 9 ..... 0.. ...... (f) 0.. I --, " I ~ \0 ~ . "- o z o ~ l? ~1 ~ ~ 1 o 0 ~lmlinHI! IX ; ~I~ ~Ij ~ ~~' ~'~~ i~+ ~ ~~~ r o .... I ~ f\4 ... "'l <lo ~ ~ ~ 1 L L - ..... ~ 'l' \0 ~ -< :O~ 5~ <(~ ~I +Icii~ ~I J::: ffi c ~ .....lllm :;: ai~~ ~ iti3x == c:: W I; -' <(~~ ~ liittl w ~ '" "11 ~ ~ ~ L~I N I- ~J I - 1- - t-- I (. . . e. r- LJ :) ~j o ~l a:h I,. ~~ V -it ...... II) ~~ Z ~~ w~ o ~~ J:e! J: - t- I 1 - ~J ~- --1' -.t--~--T--- I-- "" - - _1_ - - - - ./~, -- ~29 -_ "---. j(",l~~ ~ --- ~ 1'\ ~ '\ 11 ~ ------------ I f~/! ~ ~l --- ~ ~~~xJ\ ~/\ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ \ \ GlJ~ \ ) f----- J I (- f_ -=1 \ \ o ~;' .1 T ;9 I H:' ~" I ~.:-- J~ ~ 5' - ~ l.,j - f5 ~ ~ G ~~ <:3 0... ~< UJ 31--~ <:LW:<:Cl: ~ (ij ~~~~ 0::1'<('<( ~:::J ~i!:8itj 0 _0 f5 <"-l::t: '<( - UJo...ElCl:~ '<( "i'UJ t...J~-!l. ~ i!:El~Oo UVj Vj -Qj '<(:::J<:t...J Vj ~Cl:8El~ 8i '<((.5 c-.;'<( ~~~~8 ai!:fE ~ -~ UJ"" -'e ~~~~'<( ~Q~O ") -lL l:E~0i- eJ ,<( <(~i-Dle O~~~ ~UJ ~ Cl: i-ugjVj -J:::JOlo... "l''<( <<:~-e ~UJ<:O :::J <: ,- LW~ _f.:: Q::O::I~k ~~G~ ~~t3~~ ~-J~Vj G ~<:Uu~ ~~82 0 ~3~ Vj-<(OO 15 :::JO::I:::J ~~8i15U UVjCl:<"-l C\j "'i '<t ...: --- . ~i :: ~ Ja u HI = = U J ~ 1 j" IS: I I J i !u ~ ~ . #fU i b ~ in I ~ ~ ! I I ... .; ] IH;; ~ ~ i f!j I Ii ; ~ U I - h i i I ij I I Hi I ~ H " N II ! ! ~jl .u = = ~ w ~ .. = = = = ~ II ~ II I I J I i i i i .. .. ~ ~ ~ b b b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... 8! a ~ J ill'; l'l~ ~ i ~~ ~Q .. i ~~ ",'" ~... ~ i ::s~ ~~ I I ~~ ~ i ~'" l';~ ~~ fil~ ~~ i < ~~ Ih, !;ltli ~~'" ",I;;", ~ - '''is''' N _ ~~~ i!:~: ! . ~"'i!: '1.!~l'; = - ::S"'iS ~~t3 \2:dJl ~~J, ~ ~~~ I i I ~ i i i I J i i . - I ~ t ~ f I I i I 2 i - i i i ~ i;' ~ l!I HIlI III I nBiiliUIUII j Iji IUli 2~ i i i ~ !:! !:! i;' ~ i;' i;' ~ ~ l!I l!I = .- - ~ )J o -In <0 ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ :0 ~ln- ~ -J ~ UJ Q V) 0"'" ~ 0::1 cr ::J ~I -in. If) <\j ~"'i. ~ -J ~ Lu Cl V) ( G a G a a a 4~, <i lCl Cl: 'I' C'f\ ta ~ ~ ~ < ~~ o C'l r; g ~~ ~ o:l ~ we ....JLO <{ II U: U)...... ~ ~ Ci ~ "l ~~ ~~ z :s P-t Z 0/0 ~~ ~~ U ~ .....:l ~ ~ < (. . . . . E NB L g~ :::!~ :) ~E ii 0 Br- 0.... a: ~~ :ll -"! " tl~ ~... en U u'" Z ~u; !~ o~ 0 ~~ E J: - I- -,-.-,.. ,... Ilr. \ ~ I-'<- ---= - - ~ - ,- - - 'zf - ~ <<- ~ Ci) I __ _n~~,::I7I/ '~ - _~_ ~ ~--'- _~ ~ ~ -Jjf;" -=-:-,,,, ' ~ ~:<{-' ~- +===50 = = -.~\- -:.~. - '" · _ , l::: r- '= 'F-. '" .. , __ /" /iI)G.. ~ " \ --' ~-- --) r 1 < ..: < ~- "J-~ ',~ -=-/~>><:. - --, 'r ' ~ J-.~ ~- - . - --- -- - - - ~_1--= t.. (---\-\r --=::::~... .""""::8' ." \ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~.. - =1=- j- -:e..'''''. . "I~i'~ ~ ==r' ~~ ~.s_ ~ --= ~ \ ~(J,t'.qff 'I ~j(,:: ~ ~-"1.. ~::c: ::: ::: 'd{' \ \ R~ I, "Jf/*IiRlncf;{{1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~~ \ r 0' '" . I c', \ ,- - -, · ~ /:="~'l 1/11 I' I,k I · .,. . I',' \ I I V I ~ ="- -'1 ~ /it;:/;ll:li/ ~ I U;Vl.+~ . - -:r.; ,f"-, [~/ /( \ ", I / I ~I - L~ ,{ J 1111111i'.... I "-! I 'il-- J .. i j II"" I " IbJl ,\ I ~ ~ ....... ~ - -; ~5E 4\ \ I 1'1111 11\1'i'r'i'r\/ -,-;;." (I \ I I \ 1:<1, -B-- .; ~<(UJU1\ \....." J.VII \~I"'\'~~)I Y!r"1/ /55~ +..' ( \ l'--..~.'-=- ..... _! --\- E-< I ........ I ro"- 1\, ~ / ~, \~ -' '( 1;:< ..... Ii' ~ I I '" r . ~,;+'::)~ ~:II 16":6 ~~~~~"..:L r~' '<~ ~ I III · - ~ - - - ~. )~~O~ Jv.. ", j \ '" IlRljllij'll ~/'II · ~ -- -- , -.JL ~/~ (,F,' / / - -' \ ~::li~ " _ ~ ~-~~~.--I- :~ 7/ / (:d,11. Y, ' /; I ~'. 11::: '''', ;~ ,pc ....... ~T~ ;T/d'JI1101/ l--r~. _:.. L b I ,\I~ -~~E~~ 1'-- :>> ", ~ .,. 'L \'... ~.... \ \ ::.- II ~~~ ~" Ji; r~ ~ '%::~, , ,L: I:~/to : "'~'p,(n ll( ". _ / / / L", I ~.., "'K ." ".. -~"" ~ _ "' _ _ , I \ ~ / ~ - (~"";' f ~\'!. J.~ J--r '~::: ~ I' ~ - c.. ~ ~~41",~,..}' =~v,' LL "~E"j'S~l^-=-~-=--'~\\L L J,- ^ ^ 0 . - " '''''0 r--- ' ~ ~ . - "000 err>, , = _ __ "1___ I :c$I= ~. --, ~_ ~ ~ .IL~_ ~ ,LL-- 'v;; L. ~" I I ;>- ~ /~ ..2<'- , ~ t;:; '~~ (~D /1 ~" -- - .; ::tyrr'N.l\ ~ .\ , ri- I-, I " \ r ( I ,,::l..: : ~ ~ "I?--)} \ ~~ J LL jg::{ ~ CO \ I' L/!i~ !~i ~~, L Gi'~',;:~",~ "1; ~ ~~ ' ~\' _ -r:.~~,,~ p 1/ V"//c: -:":r; '.~.. ""c '-~~, .~) __ ~\ ___ ~t-~---= / 'j.~ n -r;c :-" ~. ,~ ,>;.. 'i"- ", /, ' :j;' .' I ~.. , , , ~ _ ~,. -"r-~' ' -/ I ~ ",~~ ,_ '-R m // / / <~'/////I;;; \ ~\~ ", ,;.. . "', or" ~ " ~ 5', // //~ ," -~\\, >~ \ '/\1 L-~ __, ~ :.: ~~ "'--../ /~<jJ/ I/k,~..." ~~.'" . \ r ti / U " _.. I' ............--;r // ,:~t'.//////(':.,:::--...:. ~...., ~ \'\'<! ~'/~.. r "~~,,",,!r-.-. ~~~rc:) !ilii ~"\\;(8iL / "i?...t////I,r----..... -, \ \ '(-~~a l"'t 0;:;_ ~ I; 'X\~~..... I! ~ If '" ' / r "r, j,' -,'I ~" " ~ / r'l!,. _ , I,.';, I. " / . ., II II' .., .. \ 'c" .. -icJ-,."" '!i~ ~I ~:J ~~.! I 'to'!,' '1/ , ~ \. ,\.; :K: 11 "u._ q, i 0 L. ,_, \ /1;' -';11//-;\, 1\1" \II 1\\ ic r1 IOo"l %. -, , / ~~~ ----.::- 5:~i!tl ~ _ t=::i::~ \_ :~~! " - - / /'//1/\ I ~ ,I ~ .' to" · · " I , . "'I ./ / /////// ('\\1' ~"I or, . . _ . . '" 1'., "'---=-~----:;;(~:~~~1I1~\~\,~ '\\\\\:> I ,_J \~'\\ J !" r , ./;; ~ -: . , ill;l '--........ '- - \>;:..../ / r;// '~\~~ \~~-0,~, 11\ 1\ \, \ (~ry- ~,\. , ,~-: i ~ , iii "!: J h" :- -.:c ":1> -:' -/~ :;:~<t\~>L?/fii 'I:;' 1 \ . ~. ~~!'c -\ . .. 1 ~ M '> "" r; ~ ~lf:flj}~~~l~~':i\\\li ;~~<!l ' "~\~~\~\\\~01'~~~~~,-~~~.", !!~ itL; ~1!9! ~~~)':JIII,j///Ij);1 0~1 ~\ II~\~IJ/ . iL \ '< \ \'0t~~)'~: .~o!;.-:~.~,.~,<, ,~ 'G'l' ~ >~' i ~!l!il I-:..cc;' ///'1/ II;; I/v I.;; IJI I '.,.,) \:I~\ r \, C' '\~' "E:'-..::~I~~_--.._<-................. ~~i:!~ -;Wt> ~," ,;- I'//' 1/(1 {I/, A / //;';//; .';~' ,.. , , '" I~:'..... '-: .'....":-iJ'ifZ'---- ..... ~ --.. \ -.., "'ill~~i"-..... ~.~ ,1" - ~ "" r r;';/ I I W. l/ 1",<:/ -. /,"/ / '1\\/ -"1 "~ " "~ . ~ --""".. . mil -..., '...' / - ;; ;.!j;/ cy ym l;m7;}:e,; (J) X\\ '<,',~oo ,~ ) "'-J' 0.. '. ~" , t-- ::"li~ ,~< _ '"::- ~ '1~ ~l!. i"l I . !ll~ " ;;;;:jjf;:.XjI;IJI/;I//'i// / h, ~i;:::::>__ ~~I~' .Jilil! il:l '", I '\v..,\ "~~~w?\ \ 't / 'I 'I" !l~! ~i ;' g{) =/1 \~~ ~ ~ /;, /N~\ !ll l!il! I!!! I ~ 515 jf5 SI / 0 G~ / /~. ~ '\( .. ~~~~~ ~~/;!~ <. I ~ ',~.' '0-' / ','" II'!. I,. s:~ "w I '" )>.) JP;Y / -::. / .c I -. / ~"{, III, ,il ~ " ~" ou w. ~ _ ~ x' / // / / _ ~ / "",,' . ,. -, , ~.~, """"'." . j ~ - / / , / / ,- ~ ~ =; / / -to)'\. ...... / ........... I r= -J ~ -;:;--{ ./ __ ____ /' ____ ____ ./ '/ ~ _ -.:::-___.......... / l: l "'~F\ _ 'J 3~' Or / <-...:},>:(/ ~ :/ // ~~~ r =::: _:::_ _ '_" I / I J 1; ~ i!: i!: ~ ~ rn ~~~ ) / _ / '-43' / - /, _ / / _ r. _, _ ~ _ , , , J / ", ., r--... vJ~/ ~~ -- / I -=/ // / -J- Ir 1'" / -'-~':."" / / / I '~~ .'" ~ ~ O@z // -~/I/I-~/llr ;-~/ ''-'-::::be::- "" / / , /. "" cl~ - ~<o / (., / / ~) f-'j:<,~~c:- I/,'o--".-~~,,,,, ", ~ / I / /, ,.~. ',m "gi I , ./ ~~'L// / .<./=-;;._ -,--;.-z"", 'r ~ I / '. ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ LI ~ I ~!21!! --" :/'~r" I I. ': ~ / _ _ ( (I( /..:e-:::>.:c c""",, ,_ / / /~ -::.. ~ / -:;. ~ :; " ~ \oJ ... wow -J 0 w / / , .'-.) ,,,, I 4 ~ :Y , )" \ ) r (' r r~___ ~ ~ ,..... ___ _ /' -' -:::-- / ,.., ... "w · <uo - / -~J 'C'\'~ _ , ~ '( ~"" / ~ / / ! m~ :!~ ~ ~~ ! j j~ ; ::::'c.~~/ 01 'Xl ~\J 2~~t~~~\\~}I~~::~~~::.~~:; ~ ~~2~ ~~: zg I m m~ ~ "::~::__~~ '\: \ ';<::'C:'::-c:.~\,I\~IIII\I\I~ rl~::::'-.. ____ ___ ___ .... I-- ::>", '" ::'u Z <(~ I ----- ..... ..... __ _ -.... 11 \1\1 111\ II \ I' ----=:-... .-/ .."/ ' '-0, ~', 0 -'0 ~ -...... _ i' __ ',I 1\' _ '-- _ <' / i 10., .~~ f- ~z "',:,:::;__, o. '" ~_, \IIIIIIII\IIII~ l\~\ \\1/_ ....:>. ~ l--~lE::> ~tl,,- Z _ f--~I-- ~~w '- ....... _ ~____ --"PJ_~ / ))\ \111,1' \ /1,--........., ....-- · .,,~ ." . '8:", " _". ___ I '1111'/ .,~ _ ~ ~~~i!: ~;;;~ ~ ~ gFt! .i .,u", ~I--\oJ l0:)-J 1--,\ <-- ~gco:J~:<~ ......' \\ \\ m "--- ~ . ~/",I< ) r ".,.," W ". - "',, '-. c---__c,__"_..~/I/' ":';h(~ . I ,~~. ~<. 0 _~.",'-.'-. \/ _, ---2 _-=-=_~ ///--Z '" :;:"<>:., "',,- "~ .....\:,,,, '\,,, \ '/, ~-- ----.//?0-x)j J. ' ~,.. ..~ 0 " , - -, ,,\\, --= '~_ --::: -uc _ CC'-=. -=- -=-.. ~-%~^ , ; ~~'I U. z '\~;; ", ~\\ II" ,.. _ _ _ ~~ ~_ $::.-::'~_~~"'~' , ..~ ~ / '..i. ;lo::J eG~ '~~~\I\\"--'----::"w--~...:::-~~-=::;..~~>< . /~:X /C-:::. I: lO<:__"" .,~ 0 ~~d .. ,_\, \".. /~""~ ~" ~-'"/ · '- -, '" z-.. - .. 'II - / __ ~0 "<'%!.". ~,.!~. , ~" 0;. w ^ -11\"" '=:- 'C'i -"b/k <'. ~ '''''' "'. ~, " '''' ~~~ ~ " :- -'\\\ "'':. ' --C'. .Y,' ~ /):., w 'i 'I,. \"'Ie "\~:;.. '_ ~ _ :::- " '" ~ ~ '" , ~-"" o -.J ~ Z /,1 \, ~ co V~1'^.JYX\ ~ < '5 " 'I j' 11\,':':. :::'- '" . ., q' ~ xV' >0 c l. '" ~ ;~':.~" ~ Y')(i;f7x;, . ~ ,_ no ...", 0 0 ~ +--1'" " '.\ <Ro<-~_ '0 . " ^ , " W Z. .. '\/ "' ""'- ~~ ~ ~&l w ~~ =- ~ ~~ r' ~9 g, f;JO u I.:kv o.^,;:: . . ;(X?; ~ ^~X? ~'I ii'u 'f~ ~ Xv, Y'><)' >\ KN"'Xy ~ ill ~: ~ ~~~)' 5' ( = ... ~ Z:::i t:l~ t:l 8::1 lil "1.. [0 ~ ~ MM il ; "fa.~~ ~~ i OJ ~ :> .-.~;!; I!ll!l ~ @ ~ :J:J ~ G~ ~ ij ~;;; ~ fllfllfllfll ~~ a J,a ~.~~~~~~~~~~~~ -!jl!! ~1t ~~i'''~''!~~~U_gg i H h Ji !;- i "" ~ . II .d A! I .J II I 0'." ~ !3 !;llll:S:;;;N ilil ~ ~ 1 U.. t .!l ~ :ll -< ~ """",::I ~~ B i r;: ~'ll S ! ~ ~ '" N t: II ~!h~ :z: ,---, ill ~ .!. i! ~ 5 <= "" o 9 I 5 ~ ~ ffi ~ w t3 ~ ffi ~ ~ ~ E I!: III ffi c.!J f2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 I!: ;!L ~~ ~. xx^ ~II 1-11 y V f!!ll !li!j! 11~~l;i !~I~!~ Ol~~i!llillli ~i~j!;~1 ~!l~;i~ ~tlllil~g ~i!li~ ~~ !i!~c!~~~~ ;11 /1 ~ ~ ~ 8 C'O ~ i ~ CO ~ ~ ~ WQ -1\0 <( II u= U'lrl l ----, z :s ~ z o ~ ~ .~ ~ w. ~ ~ ~ ceJ C'0f-t ~Z ~~, LL ~ I ~ d ~ ~ ~! < ~ ~ o f-t . w.1 J ; - I (. . . . . L~ N ~ =>>U o ~i a=h " ~~ cnH z ~~ I o ~g E~ E - ... I '- WDOt;;:Q - 900l '90 Jd'v' SUOI):J9S pOOJ :.wDN lno.<ol '6Mp'Sll'q13a-"'-SNOllJ3S-X-a'qo~\6u!uoz.u\ ;99\tOt\ :~ 1-, tj ~ lJ) g a ::t: ~ ~ <.5 l;J <: '" --r i- '" ~ ~n -...J :1 ~ i,., 8 ~ V) +.i1~~ 'i'~o -.... '" _ .., <t) I <t) 0 a <: ~ n:: -q; ~ ~ ~ ~~~l:;~ I~~~~ ~~~~~ ~)..Q ;c: ~~~~iB l:l;;::J~~ ~~~h Ii! ~ 1-, h1 ~ lJ) :5 a ~ a ~ <.5 l;J <: ~ ~ ~ "'! ~i ~ '" + ~; - I a - +~ ~u~ ~ '" ~ -+ + -S ~ Lw o <: i::::: U) 5:( l,j ~- I J J / ! I . , / , I 1'--1 J, -- I- ~ ~ ~lJ) ~:5 ~a g::t ~@5 ~ <.5 ltj <: -1- -t <0 ~n ~ ~ ~ ~ '" i-- 1 lj ~ ~~~ + ",U)<: Q ;f.i ~Cl~ II Cl-On::... ~:;:;O-q;~ ~'" ~~ ~ ~ C\J<: Q ~l g~ ~ '" <: ~ <0 -.J ~ ~Gi 9::1 ~'" a:: @ 8 >- I- i---...J ~ ~6 ~ ~ Lw lJ) U)Cl Vi Q 8 ~ ~ o~ Q '-' ::to g::t: ~ ... Cl:: "'I ~a C\J ~ ~<.5 G~ ~.... cw- <: ~ i:U -q; <: ~ <t) 1- <t) + @ <0 ~n ~ ~ ~ ~1'" i-- ~ lj <: o ~;;:-. ~ '" - ",U)'-' ~ ~ +;f.i~Cl~ll;2: a_on::'" I.,J ~ ~O-q; ~ ~'" ~~~. :5 Cl . 0 1- ~~ ::t: L l' a , <- Q) ~ ::t <0 <.5 LU <: (0 ...: ~ ! I:T 8lI f "'~ _ Cl , .' J'.l~.~ i/; Ii,., ~~ )...~ ~ Lw n:: ... -..J -oq;: ~ ~Q ~ o .. ~ <t) ~ <:: It.[;1:5 L..Jr::Q. ~~~ ~~~ ~:x1e: ~ o <: ~ <t) + ~ .., ~~ ~ J ~ sf ~ ~ i!: t3 ~ ~ _~~<:~e 1 ~ ~ ~~ i J · is ~ ~ .! ~ " ~ :!! ---~----~--- ---....--------- --- i-- ::r: ~Lw ct<: -q; E)-...J V)<: on:: ~i2 n:: Q I ! i / i I I I / ! I I I --- --- ---------- --- ------ --- ~ - t , ~ l:: ~ ~ :::r:: ~ ~ (i1 r- eo 1--1 ~ <: "'l::s c[i >-~ ~bl It. i-- a t5 <:1:::Ii5~ )(a~-Q ai:::::a-...J3 ~(5~8~~ Qan::aLw:::J -q;-...Jo...ll.Cl<.J --- --- ------ ........~~~:.~~.~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~:.......... --- ------------- ~ kf[:{;~~);. '> z ..3: ~o LSai l/llJ) <( >- ~t3 ~~ lii luQ ()ji7; <:~ lij- u; ..... I- <( E- Ci C >- <( - ::s c <( C 0: CI (J Ci 0: c: Ci - ~ wCl ~CI =>Ci (jp:: u... l- e: :z I-- ~ c.. ri CI I >: r: <1 C 0: ~ Vi l.t.J Cl C'l ;% g '-J " Cl:: ~ <: "'l:: g: ~ ~ ~ ..... <1 ~ 0: ri ~ I-- (. . . . . a. ::) o ~ " (I) Z o E E - t- ~l - - It i ~ ~ i:! e ~ ~ i !..- '<t E c( E ~ GI E g"", co :5 2!~~ ::& ~ '#.'#.'#.'$. 'llt'C'\I-r-Q) ~.o-r=&O N~(W')N ~ -- (A ~ :j < ~8 o ~ ~ b2i ~ CO ~ ~ f-. ./' ...,.1;\1..-,...... '<tl'/ltl.- c::ic::ic::iN .---- ell _ ~ C'Cf!.'#. ';je.~(j.,*, a. GI.-1O ""'C\!.-..... III l:!u:iuiQUj...tltl"":c::i c '!."''''''CI)'''.-'''C') GO ~ l!! l- e) 0 E I!!!. <: ::s I~"",CO ""''''.-..... E ","':CC1 '<tl'/ltllt) i: fioo c::ic::ic::iN 51 1'0 ---. --- iii' 2! u .!!. ell i :3; 2! N"-: u 1'0 ~~l1i~ ~~~ ai -- - ~ ~ ...-. ',{.- ---....., 7l.f /. < < ~._ <- /' ----- ( 'c -0 < ~r '-, -- < -- f."-'.;:' ,'\ -- 1-8 ~r --- ~ '", \>--r:----+ , I! r ; ~ - - - =: =: - - - ~ ~ .:-=- ~ \ C ' '" f- .~ "- - .---- - - '/ ---- / - ~ ~ ~\ J (m1,W '1'1 ifr;;:: c -- - >c < ;0' " _, \ - - ~ 1"/,-;- - ,)11 LII I I I ' /1/')/ / / \ "'- ~ \ - -,--- //(/r(lllllf'll {-()191 /-/ . >~",\ \ --... - - - -- -- i II ! (iilllll I' II ill I /.---- ..(r~ r ~ I \ -B- ",I \ I .J 11/1 (I\I\,:( I \ "'/, ,..) '.J'~' ) L Gv I \ \\\':..-t~/~"\~...J '/ (~/ri (Y ( '{ (11'-1.// ( ",; I I "'\ -... -- {j\ \1 ~ - f i{Y'--r -1fJ \... r ( 2. I t-::;;.- '{ r /~ ~ < ~ -/ I I I~ / / I!'; / , - (I j Ii" '" ~ II" -.---- - - - / --..... / ~ ----:......, 'f 1 / i ~ L } \ ~ ':: ~ ,I \ '" , ~ ". Ir .-- - Il /' 1\ =-.i r / / 1" ry:=f Y \ 'll .., ':!) - ~ " ~ I =r." ~/n~1 -'-n-v-y:::rLY'OC[C:DOCP~ ./ I ~ - \ I ...-4 ---...--.... '- ',- 'f\ - r 1:-/~, I / -- J.{) L \ \. \ .---- \. _ ___ -... ~ -;;;::Y-...J'~. "-'-j.*T-:::.":l -=" -1f~ I ~ />9:~ 1"1 ~'.;/ .. <Y I J\ J \. ". - - _ _ _ rn. ~ I" ~ "" !\ b '<;4; ~ ~ · ~I'" >",-,,1 ( " _ _, ~ ~U- I_'~ ~I ) -... "i~ l.~ p ~f ~~ + ~ . ~ II (....;. \\\\\-:- _ _ '- --- _'I --... '" ~ c ~.~ f~ J~~l'): I 1lJ e-- - <( "'--- ~ _ ,'--- _ _ _ _ L-. ~ "" I'" 'I . I-- I _ ") \ ~\ ' ~ ~~ ,I:I...--I ~ · 1--1--1 :../ '//1 I - -..... -- ---Z ~ ' I L """,-!3~ / I~.:! ., .. .... - l ""~~::~Z ~ ~ --oco ---- ~__ ~ D ~,~)~-,-;~ .P66-:-:- ~~-:r~:'~"":;:"~ [{~,V~__ /_ '~I" =[It ~~~ - J, - ..-- _ ti:, ",0 ... .... -. /'... <f ''-..J ~ ^ ___ 't-- .{ - "~I..... - - ~ -__ / (k:: +- ~, ~. ~ '~~ l' ' . '~~~~. l;;=:j~'p -.---- --- ~ v/' ~_t;;} .-----: -~-===- ---.... --> ---~ ~ )~ I u: OCJ --- . ~ l(j' ,- -::., ~---;:::....- , --~- ~-= ~ I--. 0 ." -- , :, Ir~ ' r<",-~~__ _ '__ '~ U ,--,~ I ,.---- /-- . T OJ:~ .... '~'(JlI:!( - .... \ C (~ ~/7 /cf>' ./',' ~ ~ JJi \ fri z /11" /JI I / ,/ /'. 1 ~ ( , U) \ ~J I ~/t-J'--:3i__ ~ j::~( oi~ ~ l ,~~~' \ i:: 0 /', z \ / --- J~;~ ,colt ~,; 0 - ~,.,r'.~, ) \ \ \ \ \ ~ \ / ~{/ / I; i~ , ~~' ~ .. \~+ ,J ~~ ~ /'/ \ \ \. r _" \~ ~ /0;~~~//0\ . ~V!33 ~ - _ !)\ ". ~ ~'\ ----=--1,,.,- \ \ ."'" \", ~ ,'-~ /' / // /11, I//'r-:. '..... ' !I . /.' ,r--:1- ~ ~ - J/: ,\ ~ " "-. //1 1,/ '\.' . :'\ .l( , --r"y,/,,--- A- T't-It " / / I / / /; / (' ...:::- . v I I r-- / ~ {.xi +' ~-----r --(\., ~ ~.D ( / \ \...,.I "" ". ~ / / / :/ I III II 0:: -'" \ L-,0",,~ ,-"--,, ~ ,,,- ~.. ~?" \~t~ \-~" ='-? 't- I '\. '- t- / / l/~~/! / / \'\1 ~ ,0. ~~ " '~ '1~ , '. ~ / Y < ~~Y-::: "-- I I \ ~ I 1;'/1 j'~\ / ~'}\J Ji'---. ^.:: ~---I'><9 . lI""~ " --....__~ I \ .----1 II Ijll;~"'-' \ ;:. ,.., '>-' 'Vf- ~<-.:..:... "-... ~kl-='~. ~~(?~..n:. ~ rQ ~. ~1Jd '" 1-- - II I"" \ \ ~ ~1-- r:--"'h. ~ \. '/ /. ......... rn IAi 0 \ - I 11/ i \' '. ~ , 1" p. + b ,....:"'...."-.. "-- t.l. p:~. '" '" - --./ 17 \\ I : l ~ ts: - ~ I ./ ~ -, "-- ~.~. ~J - / / /1 , --- \;:-' ,,% Ii . ._ --< 11- "J I~~~__~ :;/>~;::) ),;1)/11 II~ i'\~i\ \ {" ~~ ~:. / ~L-~~ ---. ~ ',- "-- ..........-- ....-;/;:.-;: /" P ~II \\ (\ .r"{ '" ,"-- ,~-=--- ~..... ;::.:-........ _./ IT II1I r I' : II i ~ I + ~ ~ '-.......... '" '- l. ~~~~~~/.~ \1\\\\\\\ \\r~~ \ \ J ~ \ ~~ . ~I-"--,_~", r-__.. ~ ~~;{f?I);~1 -^\JlI,\I\~ ~ \ ~ 1< C ~\ "~"~/{~M ~ .,f~c~~:--- ~ !; -.:- ;?? j///-;//// /11t::/ y ///1 /)1 ~ / f \ ~ \ \ ~\ \ {~j ~:> it!; IA ~ := '-...-.....::) ~I ~ ~:@:!/~j1~':~;:-f; ~ ~ \i \ \ \t \\\\~;:,,) ~. '~,::~--:"--,,::>-.:-- 0 il J 1:::;~21; ';'>; ,y,:,; ~ III /////, / -: /) '" c,,~ \ \' \ I <,,' '\ " xxII -- ,':::",,, ,- II:: ftl ! l&~ifl~/;;~;Yt~~;~~/~/(\ '~~~~~. '\ ~\J<~~" ,,=:r~~~~'~~~~:~ ~ Ii I \ \ I, IIII I ~ //1/ I / I 1'( \ ".J I~ i 'i';;l I ( c / ~ - = / ~ / ) I ( I \ \ \:E .! ~\\\\\\@~\~I;\\\\\\\\\~" ",~ C--:'J~~1r; ~~V"~( l:'/ 0 r:.i/ /,- '1 II \ \! f \\\\\\~\\~(~~~~\111\\\\\\\~\~\\\:\\\\:;\\1~,1;. <~~~Db~~p,-, >?"dt-i:~~~;: ;~~::t~~ -~) I- I \ )\\\\th:~\ \\~,.-~\ \~ ',.---..%L--r / y/,../ l/ ~ ,In), _ ~~/r/ ......- .......----~/ /,r- r./"- - -: s ~ WO -II.() <C II u= U)..-l .:.: ..... u c( o ...."'l'?""'lOlDb iii I- ---- ..---------- ~" ----- S~9_-.:_-_-_-_-~_-___ 1 --- - -0<0- - -250 ------ t-rs:.:RO.f:!TE::_ -- ----..... - v......_ --L_~n_._n ----~--~:-';~:---7,:-,;::~~~~~~~.- .:--------c -- -- .~.- -- - -,,-- ~'j:;.~~------- ~",,'_._.--..~ - 'v - -<::-~---B-- " I ---- - I ( ----.... -e- ~~.... - ", ----- , I I I \ I \. , ""~ \ ~ \~--------- \ _./ c) " / / / / I I , , , I I I I I I I I \ I \ .. / / / / / ,-- / / _, \ I , , 'I I 1\\ ' / G : / \,,.. , '" / ~~ ), ~' ~~ / " __n~ ' _..-n__ "!8 ~, ; ------ "'" ~~ ( rT ---- , , -=-- ~ .==-~~- S29 -- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , 0:) , -'-- -"-- ::s , , , I I I '" I I I ' I \ , " I I ~ _.----,~ \ I I / I I ~. CO I", (I-ie? >' &10' 0/ _I / : / - 1 I I I "\, r. / '/ I / '.-' I , _-- I / . .' _/ ./ , i / ~ ./ / _-- _-- _-- _r' ,-__ _/"_/\ / J?""'<, _ / / / __' " _'_-'( ~ , " , -- " --',' --- -- / -- ,-j ,--' , e' / / " , ' _ , __ ,,_ ~ , _ ,,__ ~___ "- ~ / , '''''''i'''!i,,' ,,',' __ _-:_/_/~ /,<,,_j-- _', ~~' " ""/'/1/1//1' '/"/''''/'',-, '", /,- __ ____ / __ __ _,' _ _--I '",' ""1' ", ""(1111/'," 111/ ,/ I' " I I /, ) _- _ _ ___ ./.-' _--_- / ~ _---- __,- ____~ "~'''I "'1'111/'1'('/11/", '", ", '/ ',- '/'" ---- -, ',', :: I ,: ", ::'1,11" 'I" '", 'I, 'z '.",' 1___ , ''" _----, / __/ / __ "';;0>--\ '~~"""', " , I -:: : 1<<1'/"1 II!' I 1/ ,',',',' / I ' \ '2 -It' j',' , 1/ ")', . / ,- --,--:___ __ /, <'" '<': r ~ "'-:5; :::- <:", " :, \ \ \ \ \ I:,//II,!!:: I: it: I ( : : \ \\ '---~~....- ,f,1I ,- //, \: - /-' (;r::o::- ~,-,,-' ,- ,:> I "_<:::;:", . _ 'CO,,;:'::::: ~ -., \\: 1,11,,\\: lJ \',\\ \ \ \'1,\':':-, " '- '-,--- "'~ ~ ~-- __ / \_, / / - j 0/ , ,- _ ,__ > 'i ,= ::':_~, _ '" '\~" "-', \\\ \\~{,,\,~\,\~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I, I, ,.----~-u;_~-:~,.__:/// /' l- \ " 'ZWS' '" / -, /,' - I /---;,>-=,/~c:-,t --::,"-;C"'~': \ \ II' I II \ I I I I ------1- -...........- ^ f (. __ _ I ~ _ / ,_ ~_ \. _ _ ,'~ " \\ \\\\\\~\\~"\\\\\,)",,,,, ~:::::::="'.ii. ~/ " /" ;" __ " , e-- I J; 'i--/ '\, _::.:....~'':.'\ \ \I \\\1\ 11\\\",,\.',-- ,,__ _ -oc>- 0 _ __" { , ", "'/ / < ',', " , ," -",:" \\\ \\111",\ """ "',:::----,-,, 2""~- :: \, ' I I, " ", "" ", " " #-___:' "'\''', 'J' "", '- "'-'::::;:"'0 J---', "/' / , , " , " "',,',' 'J<' '~, '''-c, ,,\,II\\(,,\'I"\'~ -"::---'-----r' '" '" \ ' , __ " I "" '__'" '''-\Ii\''' .,if" ,,'_".: ' "" ,:{,,~,,:, "":'::--",,, ,=~ ~ --\::- H, , "', \ ','- __ <::'" ~',,,,,~, 'b'\I "'-:e',, ' '\"""iV~ "-'~--"-~-=" , · , , " I \ , , ',_____ :W; ;;.,,..,, "'t-~, \ \', r __' A- "(" ~~':.' ..:::.-- --::::.-- -, '..:: " I ,/'/ \ "", "'------::.:>i\1lI'r, \,~'v .._~ I'. I 1/_;'_- ' ,,' , ,>" >"" ,0; '''i ' , ,',' (,j, "" _ ___,,",''', ,,\i1,~ i!.\."~\ J;, , \",': .' :'::--:::, , """ --~ "/ I ", ''o- "- .'''-< ~KQ '?i\ \ I, \ ,\ ,~ I I lid """" "" '''I "'1",,__, , ',___ ~,,< ,,'" " ", ", "~i;j~~=-2c"i : ' J/ 1/"; ,/, ;,: :;,:;,;; / ~--, '" ___ 5,()l\ ~ ,\: \ \ \ " ',\ \ \ \\ \ -:: \ \ : ' "'"J,' ',''j,'';~'::/:<'/''" ~ '\\: \ \\\\\'\\'1" 1\:" '. '.) ",~';' ',- <--;'>'--j -- "------,,---,j -- , J) '. I I I 1,1:: I: I :\\ I, ill ' , /, -- / / -- -- ,', "'''''' " , , / '/ """ -- "',-----,-------- -- '/,'" '/ } J J )/ I 1/ , X, -- I 'i ,o,' / / __ __-',_---,__ _/ __ /__,' ",' " / I, , '" _ _"_'_____"._ _ __,,, , / / J I / I I ,,/ I / I , , I { , I / ! : \ : I '. J I I I I I I I , , " , I .- , , I I , I , I , --, " I , '-------"'~---- I \ ................ I '-'-i--- -. ----------1____ , ------ :=L --T.--::----- --'C ,1 , , I, I , (J\;\' //[// /./- i/./~ __ /,: I~-\/ ,. f ..._ / :./ / 1-- I _, I. I .' I I I I " I / ( / I I (f \ \ \ '. \ \\~f. , , '\''- \~.\/ ......--""" " , , "\ / 'I, I. l\ " \ / '. . , / ) , , , I I I I I I I I - ./ -- / / / f I / o \ I I I , I , , I I , I I I \, , \ \ /h \LJ I I I I I " , I , , I \ I I , I ---------.....-- -,~~~- , , ,- \, '" " , " \ I '. \ I I , , , , , , I I I I I I I , " <D o o '" g :r: ~ we --11r\ .c:( II u= l/lM /' z :s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f-t en ~~ ~ 2~ ~ Z ~ u: ~ ~ r::L t- <( t-..- ....c: .....-- " (. . . e. L :) o II: g .; Uti z.. o~ E J: - I- ... ~ ~ t 6 <=19 - h - 5 lt~1 ~5 ~'i rt 11'fd1M'1:J f.fi V \ cUI II "TI 'VLf' LI'1 ~ I ___ ~../ 0 ~ " ,_ - - -- ,..- --- -' -- - r 'J ( 5 =' - '- "-". """ ,- . < "c' \ c , ( 'Jt ~--~- -- '- .=-- ~. '. \=-- ~~ - "~/ Il~ ~-'-ry,vl . // ~:~ '~ = = ~~' -:~ == ~~ -=: -=- ~ =~ :=~; ~ - ~ ..,.- ~ "'" - - -\ {I -,.. - ,-- -' --- -' - -- --=-- - - - "'. '" \, '-.:::-=. .-:- ' S: ,.. . ','--, -' - - -=-- - --=- ---::~ - -=- '---==- ---:-:- - ~ ___ --- I rl II \ t ~ i - ,I I OVq-- - ~ _- -" - -- '\ - \ II ., ~ / \{I/ I -- --- --- -- ,- -- ,- .-- , ---- ---- '- - - ~-~ -/~.:-;;\)\:r 1111, / '.' ~,,// />-~--=----_...---~~-,~~,=-:":'--" - I'> 1/-'-, \ i~ i I : \ \ 1 /1 {" F/ / / i " \ / -~ ~, j ( ( I r -~ III ill I) , 111! --I' \ 1/ / ! 1 ,_' / a~' ~ '- __ __,_ __ _' -- -- --- I i l { ,-, I!! I ~ I.! : / ~ %~ ,11 , J! / 1 / .~ --- --' -, ~ ~~ ~ ~ <;; I ( , l,i Iii I \ 'III \ I , h-lif / ',:J \ \ l", ~ I . ~ ~~ U ~ I "\ \\~~l,jj !~I:\ \ ) ~f II) I',;: / ~ ~ I niU 'liP I ~f~ IIi !Ih '-.....:::._ _' / c?1~-- - 1)/. i'~;(jll _ j;1o. ,.' , ~ \\ ~~il~ u. Ii ;IU _ .. .~V-< ~~~ ~/i JJII / ~ I f./ , ~ I\IIQI HUh !li! li! ,- --, --.,-- ~._/::: :7;:~~ --: 1/ J I//~ \ ~I) ~hr t ~ ) __ -=-:::::- _ _ ' ==- j i ~ j j .1 ~ - j ~!~~13 I - ~ 18 _ -~ _ I -/-/ -~ ~ /1 ((, 1',/:r V-'V / ~ - ~--- _ ':.~- -.-:- -__----__ -:-'" ~h~il i~, h',1 I ~!\:~ : ~ JI ~, 'f"S -l 'KI/ L-~ _, __ ,_ ~~[ (,( Ir~ " /1 ~ '" ': ~ / " ~ I~!!i~ ~l ~ a i!~~ Jll~~ I I _'__' L---,__" =-::: J-IA T--- -=-=-_ =- ~ '- ~ / / I / ~~ oj. __ ~1;'ld1l! -:. ~ i ~ti HI! i ~ l:a t --=-'=-:-=-':-:':-=---~~l tt~~( -------,'- ',~,~ i /'V:'< // ~~ ~r. ,--; '-< .~~,~~~"~ ! i'< Ilc3U)"'rl3~O ~S '" ~ 11 '''--k, \"'..? ~ '~1 j ~;, \. / l~ / ~/'~Ii ~1~dl.0~" ~lnl'io!'!W!! l \ IT" / . I':;i A.lL-IJ _ /-lfift': ~~ ~, -!--'" L.\i ~ \ _ :30 !~~iil1lN'" 8 JQ....~.. ~"'l!! l!! I n \ \....; \/- 'jR N~H~RU J......, ~~~ -l/~ Q~<::::--=,~:"'::' / II, ( ) / ~ 'Jl1/IJ' + +/lfll + 11 J/! II~ ",----.J, -r --C "( ~", -'- / \' l' J )j ,.--.~ - ,/ 11 '.1l +"-J]' . - ""'7, "'_~ (.) --.ol!:-) / -- n n n :h =,-- F J-T "" ,,- )1, / -' 1---' /': YO ~ f, n~' ~~ ~~1~ ~ j/ n:,~ / ,/ / .I '- I /l -..j __-1 --~ "'--"7. -..;. \ I \ I II I' / l!i"d~ _ IJAv/ ~, , h = ~ l';~ "- ~ -__~ tJt,~' ,_ __. _ ~ '_ !~,' -\ M ~" .-v- I :"I~~-~:..r ''; ~ ~ ~\~, ~:\ ", -, -.. -, ~.~ ~j~~~~=-===~ ~=r~ ~/St ~~ I I I I" ~"~ ~ vi \ A - _ , ::;;=t: ~ '. A _____ _/I -1f 1L If It, .IT 'rr'-rra k z:::.~' - - '~\. -- -- _ ~ '- '-.::;Av, . "T IV:: "'" - /I II~ - ~1 (r0"" "- - .. -&- Qv,~-~--'~ -.. . ~ ---'---::.. _ ,_ --' -- , '~.----.... '--1;;"_ - - ,!JJ'- ,---- - "'-- "':;><~ ~ ~i<"~ --. . ..-: ..L. . .~ ,- J - ....-..l. -........ ~ ~ :::: .::...- ~ ' . -- \---- - - -' ---- \,..." ~ - ::.~'~~r"'1H~-"~(AVoi~) - - - ~~~~'j'-\ ~-,------- ~ '-l . fi-. l3e ,f J'.Jlf I '-H:/___ __ --------- -, {'1~ I I ""~. ,',~, . ".~' / ~ ./ !J' - \ ~ \1. \ \ 1.// /\ ~---~;B~ : '" +~f4.------\ \~~-~9 '~~, '. / ) 1\ ~ _' /' -,1~' ' ) _-~<"---/ ~--J~~ / +~\ ~ ~~ \ I __ __ .</ ~ -2~:~ ~~: " ~ '. ~~: _--"1 - ~hflt /~~eW' - ~~.- : -~ ~?\ \~~\'~ ~ ~ / ) \1 ~ / / //1 ..:;... '....... \ ,--\_ -- '- /.t~ ~ ~ ':_ ~~I1---,;tg9-,-~ _;AI, <:,' / ,/ /' / / ///1, :--. ,', <~''- _ :,~.h C);j+ ~ \/ ~ . ~"i;;;v~ ~ t\~\f..-\r\ / " / I ',' //,,'//, ~ , \'o '\. '-..:, M-- T'#' ~'\1 t<<. \~\\ {\,~ _.----J .... </'//<//I~'\ 'Z'~"'--" ~\"'i.(~ //,. ),..,~ ___,~:::\....'....~ f!Jf!J\!\ . './ .--/--' / / I,' / " I, ( '..' ~. ...." ~ ,\,,,,,["'" ,..I 1)\' '-" "", ~ 'l/ \ . ( / .~ -- - - --- /////1/, ",,_:-'-...-,,:~\,~"\~\)\_-_ )'--", j,'.jJ.:'- . .~...J;::: A~ \, " ---------- / ,;//,1 ,'_,,'-..', \11\ \ \ "-:./_/_ ~","l ""'- -.., ~.. ;"." o.~ +,~ .-- / . / /Ii ~ \\\\\\\ ~ " / - --, ~-;- 1iWr_ _-."- " -- ~~.v ~ I --- I / ;," /. _ \ I "\ " '2~' , ~ -""" ~ o~~ \ , Y ....- '~~'I/ ,~J ,\ ';\\11\\ \ \\ \\(r r 11 \\ . +' .----' -'.. \,'2,~ / / j ..--:.-----: I/./~:/, \ \\' <~:~~\\\ 0 ~~\\\ 7t-j \...;:..,~ ~ "<~r>,' :_)~ }~ r: / /,1 / /-~~.:.,~~ '//1 //.\ \ '~)\I"I\I\' ,. Ii j I FQ J~" ~S~~~ ,---\ :\~ / ) 1 / / ............ II/,/" A J I \ . -, V I ~ \,., -...... '" ~\-..\ - / I ---- , / 1/ .... \ \' ! \' \' \ \ \ \ l. Iv I' </ ---f 17-- _ ~ .......' , i1 9~ - /) I " - -- , / '; I ' ~. I I \ . \ I" - --. ", '~~ J / / / /.' 1/ ,','\ \ \~\ I \ ,\ \ I LJ \ I, . -J--.-_,~~9. . ~ ----..L - \\....-,.i. - , ,', I 9/---- ,/ ,', I / I ~ ~ \ \ \. \ '-- ~."'~, -- r- t ~''\' ~ /,' ./,. Q- /;./ / ,,'~ /,;;,1 I (' ~ \~\ \ ~ I ,~\\\ I \ ~~ ' I - "Lol "--=u"- -1\\;,,,, \ : / I I I~o~~/- ",-//~'>;",>///;'/:I~\~'\\,\::\\\ II' \ \ \ \ '\ --2.'-----=-~.-:~V, \- '.. //,,& ~~U!JI-" /--. ;:,~~;5:;~>:::I\~iji)~,0',)/';ii\\\\ (l ~ \ \ \\'\ \ \ ~ --- ;:J~~ \ '. ~~~~;[rq~/- ~, V:';----.--/> </</ I(,l~,m~;/((IIIIII\\ (\ \ '\ I --';\, -1, ,,~~ . --.... x: /.- , ///,;:-- ./ "I Illflf/'11 \ I ,II "'" l, "",,'/ . /. / /-- v-::-;::-:'-:'--;-<':, 'II {III I I I \1( \ \ \ I \ \ ,!') \ \ \ \ 'o, ,.//I~ + ~ ~~ /.-~-"<:::,.. -",," / / /'- .../~~.~~_--;\$ ~~\\I\ 1\1 III ,\ \\ \ \. '\\\, \"': v//~/~~.~.~IJ~'/ / -.- / 1;- _ / / // )., \ , \ I \ \ \', \ \ \ I ,\ I \ \ \ \ ......... '/ /' Ail'. , ~/ -. / I _-'~-"---:.__(...;. ),,\\1\ 11,\\'\, 'I 1,\ \ \ \ \ \"" //', //L:<'I -- ---' ,'. ," ,_.~// ///"')1\\$''''\ II, \1 ,\1 I ~-, \'" \ ---"',.....,/ ,/( ~. / / / :::-.: --:' '1 / I ; / / / ~ / /-,; / /!) I I \ \ \ \ II \ / \ I I ;' \ \\ \\ \\ '\ \ _"I / ( \ ~( !r /~ - -..\ - i-- ./ ,I +' , / /o~ / ,I"II/il',') (/. ,\ II ,', " \, \ I \; ~!, \ ,/."1--/ , ./ ~ ). ~ h\ I ~- I! II!! In ::! I Ii" (, \~~~\,~~ N~~~-'2~ ~g~ !~ ~ ~ ~ ~~n ~ h ~ ~ ~ i'! i " ~;....- '\ ", \ \ \ -1 - ~:' III ,l~ ,~(\ii ~ii Ii~! ~ ! h !H~! i~ l'i"! ~ :tr~<~:~':-~~ ~~ "- ~ * 111m ( ,~ ~ a ~;;: ~ Ii!~ ~ h c, "" '-... -..~ ----- -'- -, ~ ~, ---- --- ~ ~-o~ '-..." _ _ :.: ~ ~ '-... ",~ - '-. ~, ~ td-, 9" _ ~,':J III I ' !il t: '...., '\..., ........ '. --- '-- --- -- -- - ',.,i:: i {........ ' " III .....lil I I _ ~\, -',,--- >-8.... ", II 11: l:::!il _ Q ~ " ~'--"""""'" - ", -'- --- -~ -, i~~" ......., ~ ~ II 11:j l::: 1 ~, ---......... ............... "~~ '\ __ lI) _III~ ~e~!il II \ \ " ~l,!,~ ) _ _p Mffik ~a ~ .,r'.... \ ') \ / I IBO(lVS /U/I'(3'NIn .J IIWIII!1l~ I - C / I j I / I ~ 15 111- ~ m-III~T I / I .---J I J / I ; = . ,IT!=- / /' I / / / 1 ~o I /' , / /' / / /' ~~ /--- /. / ./ / /'- - _ _ _/ -- ,/ 'J f'- ~ ----- .- ,--' /' ./,,/ , h l--- / -- -j //,-- ,,- ~,,/ --". ....-" ---- --:- ---" -/. -- .-' / i 15 j i I! 8 i I) i :g .... ~ i i II s ~I! jI -~n ~..ui uuuu u Ud ~ ~~~~u~ ~~ ':ac:'~~~~ NNC"lNC"ItC'l ":":~ ........ l>! lD::::iQJg ~ ~ c" ~ ~~ ..-l -< :I:., o ~ : c: ~ ~ r:iJ CO ~ we ....Iv c:( II u= (/)..-1 z :s ~ en ~ ......-t E-<< ......-t Z ~ -~ ~<r:: n:::: 0Q u:z < ~ 0- <C C ~ C Z <( ..... (. . . . . L ::) o II:: " en Z o J: J: - I- --, \..:./~ i ~ I I "J~ I ~(' .r~) ~:~ ~'I' Q:I~ U)I I ltJ "D:(_" ~ - - I ~ . '):(. ~ · ~ 11"1: / " J" \\I~ \~IG , CJ . l\ 051 , 1 I . ) / 1\ I <: o e r:::: ~ (.) ~~ ~ ~Q:: <: UU 0 lJ..J lw (.) (;)' <: -J >- Q:: <:0 ~LU a::r:~(/);:r: U~<:I~ ~~t8e: "'(UQ::o>- g::::]<..'),--Q:) .. W) } \\ \\~ ~ ~ +,' . . . I~\" .,' --r\1 \ \ ~ ~ c." "'::j A\:~~~~~I~" . ~~~/\ ():":~i!: . { ... r )..: Y :5 -J :::J "'( . ~ /) ~ ~Q::Q ... +\~.~ ~ ~ CO ~ <: ~~~ <:2Q ~~~ LU cd :s: QL5~ OQ::LC ~ Q:: . -~ . G - - ----. + ~ (/)(;)' I Q::: .,. . _ I C) ~ ~ ~ II\g_~ ~/b',~ K a ~ ~ ~ lJj ~ O'rl2Ji.. ""> '-- a r-- l-l- ""l- V' I " <- - IF _.... _ / () ~ >- <:: r\ 1/1 ~If r- \ - r:: "( L.,j <. ~ ~ ll:l ~2- r <: ~"'(. . >"~ <'- <: >- ~ I\. ~ CI) ) 8 ~ () (0 I '1 \~l \ ~:i: I I <: Lu 1"'- t ~ U () ~ ~lj~ If) ( )\1 ~ d ~~()0) ~ r ~ ,( ~ (), \\~ ~ 3 <: \U en, ~ t]g: G~~ St]"'( ~Q~ + : ~ ~ J \ \ j ~ ~ G as Ctl I I, '-' 'It- CC~ ( f--" ~~ _ Cl ~ \J · +) / ~ E\ ~~._ \ ~) V ~'YJ. ~.~ ~ "" x () G "'( ~ -; r:::: Q <: -J~(\\~ . "( <: itj lL" )~ ;t "( --...,., r , I:la \. " ~' + ~~'. I r4 ,........ + ~ + ~~ ~ + --L '-I--. ~ 0 ) '= I U) 00 Lw ~ - ~ ~ "'( "t G CJ -.I en, ~ f\ I + J "----7 ~0i I \ + J '-------" .,.--..." J \ + J '-:--7 (M/<y i pq) ~ " ~ ---v v - v- I i I ~.'} -~. - - I I I <: ;:I:: :<c ~~ /- 0)' I ~ f · _ ll:: -;;=::::} I . . I r\t>1 ~ ~ I 1- \ ~: ~ II r1r I + -' ~ I W '\ ~ ~ ~ ,r ~ r;s I~ ~~J I ~ 3: ~\ ~ ~ I I I \ _ ~j::l "I: ~H~~ II d ~ -~~'1 ~-~tl>-~ "- .I " ~ "b~+ )~~ I ~t\ ~\(. J r----- f.....,.., r '( ~ /~_ I' 1(" .\!)1~'01(0 (0 01~ '~ r f. ~ I ~~~I9--C::I9--C::Il'--C.':'Ji'rl 0 Ii, ~: / II I i/~ IJb I ~~ I ./ I / ~ () - CJ I-- -.II _ enl J , I - I ~ \ I ~) ~ I 1 I II - ~ ~~ ~ ~ t..., o ~ ~ ~ ~"' o ...........~ C <'i ~~ ~ r:i1 OJ ~ WQ -'1"1 ~ II U (J)T"'i I en t::il .....-t ~~ w .....-t ~Z ~~ ~ <C r- - f- '. " L ::>>~ O~ :i ..:1 ,,~ G! cn~ Z~ Oi J: J: - 1-' ~ ~ 0)~ I~ a~LJ~ Ka~ ~ <'-0 __ o :::::! >- <:: j:::: "'C (b lLj Cdg:<~ < >- a '( < j:::: () ~ c.J c.o c.J<lt..J :::::!~~ If) ~o::o g: ~ c.J lr) ~ (.) a -J en < ~ - t]g: G~~ st]"'C ~Qg: ''-' 'it- Q:~ \.---'" ~ < a e j:::: ~ (J ~t8 ~ ~G::: < c.Jc.J a It..J It..J (J U)' ~c5>-~es 0:t:~0);J:: c.J~<I~ ~~[8h: ~ S2 G::: a En j::: -..J ~ '- -- ~ ~ '( "f- ~ (.) a -J en ------- /""\ ~""-./ v . yo tJ f:::: ~ ~ (.) a -J en tj .f:::: -- ~ ~ '( C'\J G ., l::<' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ c-'~ ~ ~ co ~ we .IN <{ II u= l/l,.-l (fJ ~ 1--4 ~~ w 1--4 gsZ 0~ LL~ ~ (. e e eo 1 L N~ ...... 0 , _ ~l O ;P i~ II: B~ CJ ~~ .J' en 1; z ~~ o ~1 E1 E - I- Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. ScottsviJIe Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett COUNTY OF ALBEMARlE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Vrrginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 December 20, 2007 David L Slutzky Rio Sally H. Thomas SamueL Miller David C. Wyant White HaD Mr. Albert Catlett 2103 Forsythia Ln. Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Mr. Catlett: On behalf of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, I want to thank you for your interest in serving on the Joint Airport Commission. The Board had a very difficult task in selecting the members of this committee because of the strong quality of all the applicants. Although you were not selected to serve on the Committee, you were a very strong candidate. Again, thank you for your interest and I hope you will consider applying for openings on County boards and commissions in the future. Sincerely, ~c.~ Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman KCB/mrh * Printed on recycled paper Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF AlBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (434) 2%-5843 FAX (434) 2%-5800 David L. Slutzky Rio Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. ScottsviOe Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett David C. Wyant White HaD December 26, 2007 Mr. Alan Collier 7000 Monroe Court Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Mr. ~ At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on December 12, 2007, you were reappointed to the Equalization Board to represent the Rivanna District with said term to expire December 31,2008. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 2-1105). I have attached an updated roster with the names of the other members of the Board. ~ On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue serving the County in this capacity. Sincerely, \L-- Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman KCB/mrh Enclosure cc: Commonwealth's Attorney County Attorney Bruce Woodzell * Printed on recycled paper Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna Undsay G. Domer, Jr. ScattsviIle Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouell Mr. David Cooke II 1501 Old Oaks Drive Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Cooke: COUNTY OF ALBEMARlE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Vrrginia 22902-45% (434) 2%-5843 FAX (434) 2%-5800 December 26, 2007 At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on December 12, 2007, you were reappointed to the Equalization Board to represent the Jack Jouett District with said term to expire December 31,2008. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 2-1105). David L Slutzky Rio Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller David C. Wyant While Hall On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue serving the County in this capacity. KCB/mrh cc: Commonwealth's Attorney County Attorney Bruce Woodzell Sincerely, ~_c~ Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman * Printed on recycled paper Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna Undsay G. Donier, Jr. ScottsviDe Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Ms. Rosa Hudson 220 Hartmans Mill Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Hudson: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, VIrginia 22902-45% (434) 2%-5843 FAX (434) 2%-5800 December 26, 2007 At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on December 12, 2007, you were reappointed to the Equalization Board to represent the Scottsville District with said term to expire December 31,2008. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 2-1105). I have attached an updated roster with the names of the other members of the Board. David L. Slutzky Rio Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller David C. Wyant White Hall On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue serving the County in this capacity. KCB/mrh Enclosure cc: Commonwealth's Attorney County Attorney Bruce Woodzell Sincerely, kL,~~", C ~ Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman * Printed on recycled paper Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARIE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Vrrginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 David L Slutzky Rio Lindsay G. Domer, Jr. Scollsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouell David C. Wyant White HaD December 26, 2007 Mr. C. Marshall Thompson 3541 Loftsland Drive Earlysville, VA 22936 Dear Mr. Thompson: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on December 12, 2007, you were reappointed to the Equalization Board to represent the Rio District with said term to expire December 31,2008. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 2-1105). On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue serving the County in this capacity. Sincerely, ~ C&p- Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman KCB/mrh cc: Commonwealth's Attorney County Attorney Bruce Woodzell * Printed on recycled paper Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna Undsay G. Dorrier, Jr. ScottsviIIe Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Ms. Alice Nye Fitch 505 Spring Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Ms. Fitch: COUNTY OF ALBEMARIE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (434) 2%-5843 FAX (434) 2%-5800 December 26, 2007 At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on December 12, 2007, you were reappointed to the Equalization Board to represent the Samuel Miller District with said term to expire December 31,2008. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 2-1105). David L Slutzky Rio Sally H. Thomas Samuel MiI1er David C. Wyant White HaD On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue serving the County in this capacity. KCB/mrh cc: Commonwealth's Attorney County Attorney Bruce Woodzell Sincerely, {~~, L ~ Kenneth C. Boyd Chairman (j Printed on recycled paper